Ecology

Alexander JS, Zhang C, Shi K, Riordan P (2016) A granular view of a snow leopard population using camera traps in Central China. Biol Conserv 197:27–31
Google Scholar 
Aryal A, Brunton D, Ji W, Karmacharya D, McCarthy T, Bencini R et al. (2014) Multipronged strategy including genetic analysis for assessing conservation options for the snow leopard in the central Himalaya. J Mammal 95:871–881
Google Scholar 
Atzeni L, Cushman SA, Bai D, Wang J, Chen P, Shi K et al. (2020) Meta-replication, sampling bias, and multi-scale model selection: a case study on snow leopard (Panthera uncia) in western China. Ecol Evol 10:7686–7712PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bai D-F, Chen P-J, Atzeni L, Cering L, Li Q, Shi K (2018) Assessment of habitat suitability of the snow leopard (Panthera uncia) in Qomolangma National Nature Reserve based on MaxEnt modeling. Zool Res 39:373–386PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Balkenhol N, Cushman SA, Storfer AT, Waits LP, eds (2016) Landscape genetics: concepts, methods, applications, 1st ed. John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Oxford, UKBauman D, Vleminckx J, Hardy OJ, Drouet T (2018c) Testing and interpreting the shared space-environment fraction in variation partitioning analyses of ecological data. Oikos 128:274–285
Google Scholar 
Bauman D, Drouet T, Dray S, Vleminckx J (2018b) Disentangling good from bad practices in the selection of spatial or phylogenetic eigenvectors. Ecography 41:1638–1649
Google Scholar 
Bauman D, Drouet T, Fortin M, Dray S (2018a) Optimizing the choice of a spatial weighting matrix in eigenvector-based methods. Ecology 99:2159–2166PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Benone NL, Soares BE, Lobato CMC, Seabra LB, Bauman D, Montag LF de A (2020) How modified landscapes filter rare species and modulate the regional pool of ecological traits? HydrobiologiaBlair C, Weigel DE, Lazik M, Keeley AT, Walker FM, Landguth E et al. (2012) A simulation-based evaluation of methods for inferring linear barriers to gene flow. Mol Ecol Resour 12:822–833PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Blanchet FG, Legendre P, Borcard D (2008) Forward selection of explanatory variables. Ecology 89:2623–2632PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bothwell HM, Cushman SA, Woolbright SA, Hersch-Green EI, Evans LM, Whitham TG et al. (2017) Conserving threatened riparian ecosystems in the American West: Precipitation gradients and river networks drive genetic connectivity and diversity in a foundation riparian tree (Populus angustifolia). Mol Ecol 26:5114–5132PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Breyne P, Mergeay J, Casaer J (2014) Roe deer population structure in a highly fragmented landscape. Eur J Wildl Res 60:909–917
Google Scholar 
Bruggeman DJ, Wiegand T, Fernández N (2010) The relative effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on population genetic variation in the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis). Mol Ecol 19:3679–3691PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Burgess SM, Garrick RC (2020) Regional replication of landscape genetics analyses of the Mississippi slimy salamander, Plethodon mississippi. Landsc Ecol 35:337–351
Google Scholar 
Castillo JA, Epps CW, Davis AR, Cushman SA (2014) Landscape effects on gene flow for a climate-sensitive montane species, the American pika. Mol Ecol 23:843–856PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chambers SM (1995) Spatial structure, genetic variation, and the neighborhood adjustment to effective population size. Conserv Biol 9:1312–1315PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Charlesworth B (2009) Effective population size and patterns of molecular evolution and variation. Nat Rev Genet 10:195–205CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chybicki IJ, Burczyk J (2009) Simultaneous estimation of null alleles and inbreeding coefficients. J Heredity 100:106–113CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cushman SA, Landguth EL (2010) Scale dependent inference in landscape genetics. Landsc Ecol 25:967–979
Google Scholar 
Cushman SA, Shirk A, Landguth EL (2012) Separating the effects of habitat area, fragmentation and matrix resistance on genetic differentiation in complex landscapes. Landsc Ecol 27:369–380
Google Scholar 
Cushman SA, Shirk AJ, Landguth EL (2013) Landscape genetics and limiting factors. Conserv Genet 14:263–274
Google Scholar 
Cushman SA, McRae BH, McGarigal K (2015) Basics of landscape ecology: an introduction to landscapes and population processes for landscape geneticists. In: Balkhenol N, Cushman S, Storfer A, Waits L (Eds) Landscape genetics: concepts, methods, applications. Wiley, Ofxord, UK, p 11–34
Google Scholar 
Cushman SA, McKelvey KS, Hayden J, Schwartz MK (2006) Gene flow in complex landscapes: testing multiple hypotheses with causal modeling. Am Naturalist 168:486–499
Google Scholar 
Dalongeville A, Andrello M, Mouillot D, Lobreaux S, Fortin M, Lasram F et al. (2018) Geographic isolation and larval dispersal shape seascape genetic patterns differently according to spatial scale. Evol Appl 11:1437–1447CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dharmarajan G, Beasley JC, Fike JA, Rhodes OE (2014) Effects of landscape, demographic and behavioral factors on kin structure: testing ecological predictions in a mesopredator with high dispersal capability. Anim Conserv 17:225–234
Google Scholar 
Do C, Waples RS, Peel D, Macbeth GM, Tillett BJ, Ovenden JR (2014) NeEstimator v2: re-implementation of software for the estimation of contemporary effective population size (Ne) from genetic data. Mol Ecol Resour 14:209–214CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Dray S, Dufour A (2007) The ade4 package: implementing the duality diagram for ecologists. J Stat Soft 22:1–20
Google Scholar 
Dray S, Legendre P, Peres-Neto PR (2006) Spatial modelling: a comprehensive framework for principal coordinate analysis of neighbour matrices (PCNM). Ecol Model 196:483–493
Google Scholar 
Dray S, Bauman D, Blanchet G, Borcard D, Clappe S, Guenard G, et al. (2020) adespatial: multivariate multiscale spatial analysis. R package version 0.3-8. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=adespatialEvans JS (2020) spatialEco. R package version 1.3-1, https://github.com/jeffreyevans/spatialEcoForester BR, Jones MR, Joost S, Landguth EL, Lasky JR (2016) Detecting spatial genetic signatures of local adaptation in heterogeneous landscapes. Mol Ecol 25:104–120CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
François O, Durand E (2010) Spatially explicit Bayesian clustering models in population genetics. Mol Ecol Resour 10:773–784PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Frankham R (1996) Relationship of genetic variation to population size in wildlife. Conserv Biol 10:1500–1508
Google Scholar 
Frankham R (2005) Genetics and extinction. Biol Conserv 126:131–140
Google Scholar 
Galpern P, Peres-Neto PR, Polfus J, Manseau M (2014) MEMGENE: Spatial pattern detection in genetic distance data. Methods Ecol Evolution 5:1116–1120
Google Scholar 
Galpern P, Manseau M, Hettinga P, Smith K, Wilson P (2012) Allelematch: an R package for identifying unique multilocus genotypes where genotyping error and missing data may be present. Mol Ecol Resour 12:771–778PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Guerrero J, Byrne AW, Lavery J, Presho E, Kelly G, Courcier EA et al. (2018) The population and landscape genetics of the European badger (Meles meles) in Ireland. Ecol Evol 8:10233–10246PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Guillot G, Leblois R, Coulon A, Frantz AC (2009) Statistical methods in spatial genetics. Mol Ecol 18:4734–4756PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hearn AJ, Cushman SA, Goossens B, Ross J, Macdonald EA, Hunter LTB et al. (2019) Predicting connectivity, population size and genetic diversity of Sunda clouded leopards across Sabah, Borneo. Landsc Ecol 34:275–290
Google Scholar 
Hein C, Moniem HEA, Wagner HH (2021) Can we compare effect size of spatial genetic structure between studies and species using moran eigenvector maps? Frontiers. Ecol Evol 9:612718
Google Scholar 
Jackson DA (1993) Stopping rules in principal components analysis: a comparison of heuristical and statistical approaches. Ecology 74:2204–2214
Google Scholar 
Jackson ND, Fahrig L (2016) Habitat amount, not habitat configuration, best predicts population genetic structure in fragmented landscapes. Landsc Ecol 31:951–968
Google Scholar 
Janecka J, Jackson R, Yuquang Z et al. (2008) Population monitoring of snow leopards using noninvasive collection of scat samples: a pilot study. Anim Conserv 11:401–411
Google Scholar 
Janecka JE, Janecka JE, Yu-Guang Z, Di-Qiang L, Munkhtsog B, Bayaraa M et al. (2017) Range-wide snow leopard phylogeography supports three subspecies. J Hered 108:597–607PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Johansson Ö, Rauset G, Samelius G, McCarthy T, Andrén H, Tumursukh L et al. (2016) Land sharing is essential for snow leopard conservation. Biol Conserv 203:1–7
Google Scholar 
Johansson Ö, Koehler G, Rauset G, Samelius G, Andrén H, Mishra C et al. (2018) Sex-specific seasonal variation in puma and snow leopard home range utilization. Ecosphere 9(8):e02371. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2371.Article 

Google Scholar 
Johansson Ö, Ausilio G, Low M, Lkhagvajav P, Weckworth B, Sharma K (2021) The timing of breeding and independence for snow leopard females and their cubs. Mamm Biol 101:173–180
Google Scholar 
Jombart T (2008b) adegenet: a R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers. Bioinformatics 24:1403–1405CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jombart T, Pontier D, Dufour AB (2009) Genetic markers in the playground of multivariate analysis. Heredity 102:330–341CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jombart T, Devillard S, Dufour A-B, Pontier D (2008a) Revealing cryptic spatial patterns in genetic variability by a new multivariate method. Heredity 101:hdy200834
Google Scholar 
Jombart T (2017) An introduction to adegenet 2.1.0. https://github.com/thibautjombart/adegenet/wiki/TutorialsKarmacharya DB, Thapa K, Shrestha R, Dhakal M, Janecka JE (2011) Noninvasive genetic population survey of snow leopards (Panthera uncia) in Kangchenjunga conservation area, Shey Phoksundo National Park and surrounding buffer zones of Nepal. BMC Research Notes 4:516PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kaszta Ż, Cushman SA, Hearn AJ, Burnham D, Macdonald EA, Goossens B et al. (2019) Integrating Sunda clouded leopard (Neofelis diardi) conservation into development and restoration planning in Sabah (Borneo). Biol Conserv 235:63–76
Google Scholar 
Kaszta Ż, Cushman SA, Htun S, Naing H, Burnham D, Macdonald DW (2020) Simulating the impact of Belt and Road initiative and other major developments in Myanmar on an ambassador felid, the clouded leopard, Neofelis nebulosa. Landsc Ecol 35:727–746
Google Scholar 
Kindt R, Coe R (2005) Tree diversity analysis: a manual and software for common statistical methods for ecological and biodiversity studies. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), Nairobi (Kenya). http://www.worldagroforestry.org/output/tree-diversity-analysisKorablev MP, Poyarkov AD, Karnaukhov AS, Zvychaynaya EYU, Kuksin AN, Malykh SV et al. (1776) Large-scale and fine-grain population structure and genetic diversity of snow leopards (Panthera uncia Schreber, 1776) from the northern and western parts of the range with an emphasis on the Russian population. Conserv Genet 22:397–410
Google Scholar 
Kuhn A, Bauman D, Darras H, Aron S (2017) Sex-biased dispersal creates spatial genetic structure in a parthenogenetic ant with a dependent-lineage reproductive system. Heredity 119:207–213CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Landguth E, Cushman S, Schwz M, Mckelvey K, Mury M, Luikart G (2010) Quantifying the lag time to detect barriers in landscape genetics. Mol Ecol 19:4179–4191CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Landguth EL, Cushman SA (2010) cdpop: A spatially explicit cost distance population genetics program. Mol Ecol Resour 10:156–161CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Landguth EL, Fedy BC, Oyler-Mccance SJ, Garey AL, Emel SL, Mumma M et al. (2012) Effects of sample size, number of markers, and allelic richness on the detection of spatial genetic pattern. Mol Ecol Resour 12:276–284
Google Scholar 
Legendre P, Oksanen J, ter Braak CJF (2011) Testing the significance of canonical axes in redundancy analysis. Methods Ecol Evol 2:269–277
Google Scholar 
Legendre P, Fortin M-J, Borcard D (2015) Should the Mantel test be used in spatial analysis? Methods Ecol Evol 6:1239–1247
Google Scholar 
Li J, Weckworth BV, McCarthy TM, Liang X, Liu Y, Xing R et al. (2020) Defining priorities for global snow leopard conservation landscapes. Biol Conserv 241:108387
Google Scholar 
Macdonald EA, Cushman SA, Landguth EL, Hearn AJ, Malhi Y, Macdonald DW (2018) Simulating impacts of rapid forest loss on population size, connectivity and genetic diversity of Sunda clouded leopards (Neofelis diardi) in Borneo. Plos One 13:e0196974PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Manel S, Poncet BN, Legendre P, Gugerli F, Holderegger R (2010) Common factors drive adaptive genetic variation at different spatial scales in Arabis alpina. Mol Ecol 19:3824–35PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mateo-Sánchez MC, Balkenhol N, Cushman S, Pérez T, Domínguez A, Saura S (2015) A comparative framework to infer landscape effects on population genetic structure: are habitat suitability models effective in explaining gene flow? Landscape Ecol 30:1405–1420
Google Scholar 
McCarthy TM, Fuller TK, Munkhtsog B (2005) Movements and activities of snow leopards in Southwestern Mongolia. Biol Conserv 124:527–537
Google Scholar 
McCarthy T, Mallon D, Jackson R, Zahler P, McCarthy K (2017) Panthera uncia. The IUCN red list of threatened species 2017: e.T22732A50664030. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-2.RLTS.T22732A50664030.en. Accessed 29 June 2019Miquel C, Bellemain E, Poillot C, Bessiere J, Durand A, Taberlet P (2006) Quality indexes to assess the reliability of genotypes in studies using noninvasive sampling and multiple-tube approach. Mol Ecol Notes 6:985–988
Google Scholar 
Neel MC, McKelvey K, Ryman N, Lloyd MW, Bull RS, Allendorf FW et al. (2013) Estimation of effective population size in continuously distributed populations: there goes the neighborhood. Heredity 111:189–199CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, et al. (2019) vegan: community ecology package. R package version 2.5-6. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegancitatOyler-McCance SJ, Fedy BC, Landguth EL (2013) Sample design effects in landscape genetics. Conserv Genet 14:275–285
Google Scholar 
Paradis E (2010) pegas: an R package for population genetics with an integrated–modular approach. Bioinformatics 26:419–420CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Patterson N, Price AL, Reich D (2006) Population structure and eigenanalysis. Plos Genet 2:e190PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Peakall R, Smouse PE (2006) GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol Ecol Notes 6:288–295
Google Scholar 
Peakall R, Smouse PE (2012) GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research-an update. Bioinformatics 28:2537–2539CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pearson K (1901) On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Philos Mag 2:559–572
Google Scholar 
Peres-Neto PR, Legendre P, Dray S, Borcard D (2006) Variation partitioning of species data matrices: estimation and comparison of fractions. Ecology 87:2614–2625PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model 190:231–259
Google Scholar 
Riordan P, Cushman SA, Mallon D, Shi K, Hughes J (2016) Predicting global population connectivity and targeting conservation action for snow leopard across its range. Ecography 39:419–426
Google Scholar 
Rousset F (2008) genepop’007: a complete re-implementation of the genepop software for Windows and Linux. Mol Ecol Resour 8:103–106PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ruiz-Gonzalez A, Cushman SA, Madeira MJ, Randi E, Gómez-Moliner BJ (2015) Isolation by distance, resistance and/or clusters? Lessons learned from a forest-dwelling carnivore inhabiting a heterogeneous landscape. Mol Ecol 24:5110–5129PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Savary P, Foltête J, Moal H, Vuidel G, Garnier S (2021) Analysing landscape effects on dispersal networks and gene flow with genetic graphs. Mol Ecol Resour 21:1167–1185PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Schwartz MK, McKelvey KS (2008) Why sampling scheme matters: the effect of sampling scheme on landscape genetic results. Conserv Genet 10:441
Google Scholar 
Shirk AJ, Cushman SA (2011) sGD: software for estimating spatially explicit indices of genetic diversity. Mol Ecol Resour 11:922–934CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Shirk AJ, Cushman SA (2014) Spatially-explicit estimation of Wright’s neighborhood size in continuous populations. Front Ecol Evolution 2:62
Google Scholar 
Shirk AJ, Landguth EL, Cushman SA (2020) The effect of gene flow from unsampled demes in landscape genetic analysis. Mol Ecol Resour 21:394–403PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Shirk AJ, Wallin DO, Cushman SA, Rice CG, Warheit KI (2010) Inferring landscape effects on gene flow: a new model selection framework. Mol Ecol 19:3603–3619CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Shirk AJ, Landguth EL, Cushman SA (2017a) A comparison of regression methods for model selection in individual-based landscape genetic analysis. Mol Ecol Resour 18:55–67Shirk AJ, Landguth EL, Cushman SA (2017b) A comparison of individual-based genetic distance metrics for landscape genetics. Mol Ecol Resour 17:1308–1317Short-Bull RA, Cushman S, Mace R, Chilton T, Kendall K, Landguth E et al. (2011) Why replication is important in landscape genetics: American black bear in the Rocky Mountains. Mol Ecol 20:1092–1107
Google Scholar 
Shrestha B, Kindlmann P (2020) Implications of landscape genetics and connectivity of snow leopard in the Nepalese Himalayas for its conservation. Sci Rep 10:19853CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Stekhoven DJ (2013) missForest: nonparametric missing value imputation using random forest. R package version 1.4Storfer A, Murphy MA, Spear SF, Holderegger R, Waits LP (2010) Landscape genetics: where are we now? Mol Ecol 19:3496–3514PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wagner HH, Fortin M-J (2012) A conceptual framework for the spatial analysis of landscape genetic data. Conserv Genet 14:253–261
Google Scholar 
Wagner HH, Fortin MJ (2016) Basics of spatial data analysis: linking landscape and genetic data for landscape genetic studies. In: Balkenhol N, Cushman SA, Storfer AT, Waits LP, eds. Landscape genetics: concepts, methods, applications, 1st ed. John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Oxford, UK. pp. 77–98Wahlund S (1928) Composition of populations and correlation appearances viewed in relation to the studies of inheritance. Hereditas 11:65–106
Google Scholar 
Wan HY, Cushman SA, Ganey JL (2019) Improving habitat and connectivity model predictions with multi-scale resource selection functions from two geographic areas. Landsc Ecol 34:503–519
Google Scholar 
Wasserman TN, Cushman SA, Schwartz MK, Wallin DO (2010) Spatial scaling and multi-model inference in landscape genetics: Martes americana in northern Idaho. Landsc Ecol 25:1601–1612
Google Scholar 
Weckworth B (2021) Snow leopard (Panthera uncia) genetics: the knowledge gaps, needs, and implications for conservation. J Indian I Sci 101:279–290
Google Scholar 
Wollenberg AL, van den (1977) Redundancy analysis. An alternative for canonical correlation analysis. Psychometrika 42:207–219
Google Scholar 
Wright S (1943) Isolation by distance. Genetics 28:114–138CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wright S (1946) Isolation by distance under diverse systems of mating. Genetics 31:39–59CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wu S, Qinye Y, Du Z (2003) Delineation of eco-geographic regional system of China. J Geogr Sci 13:309
Google Scholar 
Zeller KA, Jennings MK, Vickers TW, Ernest HB, Cushman SA, Boyce WM (2018) Are all data types and connectivity models created equal? Validating common connectivity approaches with dispersal data. Divers Distrib 24:868–879
Google Scholar 
Zhang Y, Hacker C, Zhang Y, Xue Y, Wu L, Dai Y et al. (2019) An analysis of genetic structure of snow leopard populations in Sanjiang-Yuan and Qilianshan National Parks. Acta Theriologica Sin 39:442–449
Google Scholar  More

1.Bever JD, Mangan SA, Alexander HM. Maintenance of plant species diversity by pathogens. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2015;46:305–25.
Google Scholar 
2.Peay KG. The mutualistic niche: mycorrhizal symbiosis and community dynamics. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2016;47:143–64.
Google Scholar 
3.Tedersoo L, Bahram M, Zobel M. How mycorrhizal associations drive plant population and community biology. Science. 2020;367:eaba1223.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
4.Bever JD, Dickie IA, Facelli E, Facelli JM, Klironomos J, Moora M, et al. Rooting theories of plant community ecology in microbial interactions. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010;25:468–78.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
5.Bever JD, Platt TG, Morton ER. Microbial population and community dynamics on plant roots and their feedbacks on plant communities. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2012;66:265–83.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
6.Ke PJ, Miki T. Incorporating the soil environment and microbial community into plant competition theory. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:1066.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
7.Mangan SA, Schnitzer SA, Herre EA, Mack KM, Valencia MC, Sanchez EI, et al. Negative plant-soil feedback predicts tree-species relative abundance in a tropical forest. Nature. 2010;466:752–5.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
8.Bennett JA, Maherali H, Reinhart KO, Lekberg Y, Hart MM, Klironomos J. Plant-soil feedbacks and mycorrhizal type influence temperate forest population dynamics. Science. 2017;355:181–4.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
9.Teste FP, Kardol P, Turner BL, Wardle DA, Zemunik G, Renton M, et al. Plant-soil feedback and the maintenance of diversity in Mediterranean-climate shrublands. Science. 2017;355:173–6.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
10.Semchenko M, Leff JW, Lozano YM, Saar S, Davison J, Wilkinson A, et al. Fungal diversity regulates plant-soil feedbacks in temperate grassland. Sci Adv. 2018;4:eaau4578.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
11.Chen L, Swenson NG, Ji N, Mi X, Ren H, Guo L, et al. Differential soil fungus accumulation and density dependence of trees in a subtropical forest. Science. 2019;366:124–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
12.LaManna JA, Walton ML, Turner BL, Myers JA. Negative density dependence is stronger in resource-rich environments and diversifies communities when stronger for common but not rare species. Ecol Lett. 2016;19:657–67.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
13.Eppinga MB, Baudena M, Johnson DJ, Jiang J, Mack KM, Strand AE, et al. Frequency-dependent feedback constrains plant community coexistence. Nat Ecol Evol. 2018;2:1403–7.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
14.Brundrett MC. Coevolution of roots and mycorrhizas of land plants. New Phytol. 2002;154:275–304.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.van der Linde S, Suz LM, Orme CDL, Cox F, Andreae H, Asi E, et al. Environment and host as large-scale controls of ectomycorrhizal fungi. Nature. 2018;558:243–8.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
16.Schroeder JW, Martin JT, Angulo DF, Razo IAD, Barbosa JM, Perea R, et al. Host plant phylogeny and abundance predict root‐associated fungal community composition and diversity of mutualists and pathogens. J Ecol. 2019;107:1557–66.
Google Scholar 
17.Jiang J, Karen CA, Mara B, Maarten BE, James AE, James DB. Pathogens and mutualists as joint drivers of host species coexistence and turnover: implications for plant competition and succession. Am Nat. 2020;195:591–602.
Google Scholar 
18.Schroeder JW, Dobson A, Mangan SA, Petticord DF, Herre EA. Mutualist and pathogen traits interact to affect plant community structure in a spatially explicit model. Nat Commun. 2020;11:2204.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
19.Gilbert GS, Webb CO. Phylogenetic signal in plant pathogen‐host range. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:4979–83.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
20.Liu X, Liang M, Etienne RS, Wang Y, Staehelin C, Yu S. Experimental evidence for a phylogenetic Janzen‐Connell effect in a subtropical forest. Ecol Lett. 2012;15:111–8.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
21.Liang M, Liu X, Etienne RS, Huang F, Wang Y, Yu S. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi counteract the Janzen‐Connell effect of soil pathogens. Ecology. 2015;96:562–74.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
22.Benítez MS, Hersh MH, Vilgalys R, Clark JS. Pathogen regulation of plant diversity via effective specialization. Trends Ecol Evol. 2013;28:705–11.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
23.Klironomos J, Zobel M, Tibbett M. Forces that structure plant communities: quantifying the importance of the mycorrhizal symbiosis. New Phytol. 2011;189:366–70.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
24.van der Heijden MGA, Bardgett RD, van Straalen NM. The unseen majority: soil microbes as drivers of plant diversity and productivity in terrestrial ecosystems. Eco Lett. 2008;11:296–310.
Google Scholar 
25.Wiegand T, Moloney KA. Rings, circles, and null‐models for point pattern analysis in ecology. Oikos. 2004;104:209–29.
Google Scholar 
26.Perry GL, Miller BP, Enright NJ. A comparison of methods for the statistical analysis of spatial point patterns in plant ecology. Plant Ecol. 2006;187:59–82.
Google Scholar 
27.Law R, Illian J, Burslem DF, Gratzer G, Gunatilleke CV, Gunatilleke IA. Ecological information from spatial patterns of plants: insights from point process theory. J Ecol. 2009;97:616–28.
Google Scholar 
28.Liang M, Liu X, Parker IM, Johnson D, Zheng Y, Luo S, et al. Soil microbes drive phylogenetic diversity-productivity relationships in a subtropical forest. Sci Adv. 2019;5:eaax5088.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
29.Chen Y, Jia P, Cadotte MW, Wang P, Liu X, Qi Y, et al. Rare and phylogenetically distinct plant species exhibit less diverse root-associated pathogen communities. J Ecol. 2019;107:1226–37.
Google Scholar 
30.Peters HA. Neighbour‐regulated mortality: the influence of positive and negative density dependence on tree populations in species‐rich tropical forests. Ecol Lett. 2003;6:757–65.
Google Scholar 
31.Cutler DR, Edwards TC Jr, Beard KH, Cutler A, Hess KT, Gibson J, et al. Random forests for classification in ecology. Ecology. 2007;88:2783–92.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
32.Kattge J, Diaz S, Lavorel S, Prentice IC, Leadley P, Bönisch G, et al. TRY – a global database of plant traits. Glob Chang Biol. 2011;17:2905–35.PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
33.Davey ML, Heegaard E, Halvorsen R, Ohlson M, Kauserud H. Seasonal trends in the biomass and structure of bryophyte-associated fungal communities explored by 454 pyrosequencing. New Phytol. 2012;195:844–56.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
34.Nguyen NH, Song Z, Bates ST, Branco S, Tedersoo L, Menke J, et al. FUNGuild: an open annotation tool for parsing fungal community datasets by ecological guild. Fungal Ecol. 2016;20:241–8.
Google Scholar 
35.Leff JW, Bardgett RD, Wilkinson A, Jackson BG, Pritchard WJ, Jonathan R, et al. Predicting the structure of soil communities from plant community taxonomy, phylogeny, and traits. ISME J. 2018;12:1794–805.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
36.Wang Z, Jiang Y, Deane DC, He F, Shu W, Liu Y. Effects of host phylogeny, habitat and spatial proximity on host specificity and diversity of pathogenic and mycorrhizal fungi in a subtropical forest. New Phytol. 2019;223:462–74.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
37.Zhao Z, Li X, Liu MF, Merckx VS, Saunders RM, Zhang D. Specificity of assemblage, not fungal partner species, explains mycorrhizal partnerships of mycoheterotrophic Burmannia plants. ISME J. 2021;15:1614–27.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
38.Peay KG, Baraloto C, Fine PV. Strong coupling of plant and fungal community structure across western Amazonian rainforests. ISME J. 2013;7:1852–61.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
39.Barberán A, McGuire KL, Wolf JA, Jones FA, Wright SJ, Turner BL, et al. Relating belowground microbial composition to the taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional trait distributions of trees in a tropical forest. Ecol Lett. 2015;18:1397–405.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
40.LaManna JA, Belote RT, Burkle LA, Catano CP, Myers JA. Negative density dependence mediates biodiversity-productivity relationships across scales. Nat Ecol Evol. 2017;1:1107–15.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
41.Peh KS, Lewis SL, Lloyd J. Mechanisms of monodominance in diverse tropical tree‐dominated systems. J Ecol. 2011;99:891–8.
Google Scholar 
42.Johnson DJ, Clay K, Phillips RP. Mycorrhizal associations and the spatial structure of an old-growth forest community. Oecologia. 2018;186:195–204.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
43.Waud M, Busschaert P, Lievens B, Jacquemyn H. Specificity and localised distribution of mycorrhizal fungi in the soil may contribute to co-existence of orchid species. Fungal Ecol. 2016;20:155–65.
Google Scholar 
44.Põlme S, Bahram M, Jacquemyn H, Kennedy P, Kohout P, Moora M, et al. Host preference and network properties in biotrophic plant–fungal associations. New Phytol. 2018;217:1230–9.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
45.Simard SW, Beiler KJ, Bingham MA, Deslippe JR, Philip LJ, Teste FP. Mycorrhizal networks: mechanisms, ecology and modelling. Fungal Biol Rev. 2012;26:39–60.
Google Scholar 
46.Bever JD, Westover KM, Antonovics J. Incorporating the soil community into plant population dynamics: the utility of the feedback approach. J Ecol. 1997;85:561–73.
Google Scholar 
47.Bardgett RD, Wardle DA. Aboveground-belowground linkages: biotic interactions, ecosystem processes, and global change. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010.48.Kandlikar GS, Johnson CA, Yan X, Kraft NJ, Levine JM. Winning and losing with microbes: how microbially mediated fitness differences influence plant diversity. Ecol Lett. 2019;22:1178–91.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
49.Swenson NG, Iida Y, Howe R, Wolf A, Umaña MN, Petprakob K, et al. Tree co-occurrence and transcriptomic response to drought. Nat Commun. 2017;8:1996.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
50.Řezáčová V, Gryndler M, Bukovská P, Šmilauer P, Jansa J. Molecular community analysis of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi—contributions of PCR primer and host plant selectivity to the detected community profiles. Pedobiologia. 2016;59:179–87.
Google Scholar 
51.Hart MM, Reader RJ, Klironomos JN. Plant coexistence mediated by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Trends Ecol Evol. 2003;18:418–23.
Google Scholar 
52.Taylor DL, Walters WA, Lennon NJ, Bochicchio J, Krohn A, Caporaso JG, et al. Accurate estimation of fungal diversity and abundance through improved lineage-specific primers optimized for Illumina amplicon sequencing. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016;82:7217–26.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
53.Lekberg Y, Vasar M, Bullington LS, Sepp SK, Antunes PM, Bunn R, et al. More bang for the buck? Can arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal communities be characterized adequately alongside other fungi using general fungal primers? New Phytol. 2018;220:971–6.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
54.Egan CP, Rummel A, Kokkoris V, Klironomos J, Lekberg Y, Hart MM. Using mock communities of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi to evaluate fidelity associated with Illumina sequencing. Fungal Ecol. 2018;33:52–64.
Google Scholar  More

1.Fuhrman JA. Marine viruses and their biogeochemical and ecological effects. Nature. 1999;399:541–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
2.Suttle CA. Viruses in the sea. Nature. 2005;437:356–61.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
3.Breitbart M. Marine viruses: truth or dare. Ann Rev Mar Sci. 2012;4:425–48.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
4.Brum JR, Sullivan MB. Rising to the challenge: accelerated pace of discovery transforms marine virology. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015;13:147–59.5.Breitbart M, Thompson L, Suttle C, Sullivan M. Exploring the vast diversity of marine viruses. Oceanography. 2007;20:135–9.
Google Scholar 
6.Puxty RJ, Millard AD, Evans DJ, Scanlan DJ. Shedding new light on viral photosynthesis. Photosynth Res. 2015;126:71–97.7.Sharon I, Tzahor S, Williamson S, Shmoish M, Man-Aharonovich D, Rusch DB, et al. Viral photosynthetic reaction center genes and transcripts in the marine environment. ISME J. 2007;1:492–501.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
8.Roux S, Hawley AK, Torres Beltran M, Scofield M, Schwientek P, Stepanauskas R, et al. Ecology and evolution of viruses infecting uncultivated SUP05 bacteria as revealed by single-cell- and meta-genomics. Elife. 2014;3:e03125.9.Trubl G, Jang H Bin, Roux S, Emerson JB, Solonenko N, Vik DR, et al. Soil viruses are underexplored players in ecosystem carbon processing. mSystems. 2018;3:e00076–18.10.Roux S, Brum JR, Dutilh BE, Sunagawa S, Duhaime MB, Loy A, et al. Ecogenomics and potential biogeochemical impacts of globally abundant ocean viruses. Nature. 2016;537:689–93.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
11.Hurwitz BL, Brum JR, Sullivan MB. Depth-stratified functional and taxonomic niche specialization in the ‘core’ and ‘flexible’ Pacific Ocean Virome. ISME J. 2015;9:472–84.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
12.Gazitúa MC, Vik DR, Roux S, Gregory AC, Bolduc B, Widner B, et al. Potential virus-mediated nitrogen cycling in oxygen-depleted oceanic waters. ISME J. 2021;15:981–98.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
13.Brum JR, Ignacio-Espinoza JC, Roux S, Doulcier G, Acinas SG, Alberti A, et al. Ocean plankton. Patterns and ecological drivers of ocean viral communities. Science. 2015;348:1261498.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
14.Cassman N, Prieto-Davó A, Walsh K, Silva GGZ, Angly F, Akhter S, et al. Oxygen minimum zones harbour novel viral communities with low diversity. Environ Microbiol. 2012;14:3043–65.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.Vik D, Gazitúa MC, Sun CL, Zayed AA, Aldunate M, Mulholland MR, et al. Genome-resolved viral ecology in a marine oxygen minimum zone. Environ Microbiol. 2021;23:2858–74.16.Mara P, Vik D, Pachiadaki MG, Suter EA, Poulos B, Taylor GT, et al. Viral elements and their potential influence on microbial processes along the permanently stratified Cariaco Basin redoxcline. ISME J. 2020;14:3079–92.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
17.Tiano L, Garcia-Robledo E, Dalsgaard T, Devol AH, Ward BB, Ulloa O, et al. Oxygen distribution and aerobic respiration in the north and south eastern tropical Pacific oxygen minimum zones. Deep Res Part I Oceanogr Res Pap. 2014;94:173–83.CAS 

Google Scholar 
18.Schmidtko S, Stramma L, Visbeck M. Decline in global oceanic oxygen content during the past five decades. Nature. 2017;542:335–9.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
19.Paulmier A, Ruiz-Pino D. Oxygen minimum zones (OMZs) in the modern ocean. Prog Oceanogr. 2009;80:113–28.
Google Scholar 
20.Wright JJ, Konwar KM, Hallam SJ. Microbial ecology of expanding oxygen minimum zones. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2012;10:381–94.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
21.Bertagnolli AD, Stewart FJ. Microbial niches in marine oxygen minimum zones. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2018;1:723–9.22.Codispoti LA, Friedrich GE, Packard TT, Glover HE, Kelly PJ, Spinrad RW, et al. High nitrite levels off northern Peru: a signal of instability in the marine denitrification rate. Science. 1986;233:1200 LP–1202.
Google Scholar 
23.Canfield DE, Stewart FJ, Thamdrup B, De Brabandere L, Dalsgaard T, Delong EF, et al. A cryptic sulfur cycle in oxygen-minimum-zone waters off the Chilean coast. Science. 2010;330:1375–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
24.Hurwitz BL, Westveld AH, Brum JR, Sullivan MB. Modeling ecological drivers in marine viral communities using comparative metagenomics and network analyses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:10714 LP–10719.
Google Scholar 
25.Garcia-Robledo E, Padilla CC, Aldunate M, Stewart FJ, Ulloa O, Paulmier A, et al. Cryptic oxygen cycling in anoxic marine zones. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114:8319–24.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
26.Lavin P, González B, Santibáñez JF, Scanlan DJ, Ulloa O. Novel lineages of Prochlorococcus thrive within the oxygen minimum zone of the eastern tropical South Pacific. Environ Microbiol Rep. 2010;2:728–38.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
27.Ulloa O, Canfield DE, DeLong EF, Letelier RM, Stewart FJ. Microbial oceanography of anoxic oxygen minimum zones. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109:15996–6003.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
28.Bettarel Y, Sime-Ngando T, Amblard C, Dolan J. Viral activity in two contrasting lake ecosystems. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004;70:2941–51.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
29.Weinbauer MG, Brettar I, Höfle MG. Lysogeny and virus-induced mortality of bacterioplankton in surface, deep, and anoxic marine waters. Limnol Oceanogr. 2003;48:1457–65.
Google Scholar 
30.Heldal M, Bratbak G. Production and decay of viruses in aquatic environments. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 1991;72:205–12.
Google Scholar 
31.Proctor LM, Fuhrman JA. Viral mortality of marine bacteria and cyanobacteria. Nature. 1990;343:60–62.
Google Scholar 
32.Brum JR, Morris J, Décima M, Stukel M. Mortality in the oceans: causes and consequences. In Eco-DAS IX Symposium Proceedings. Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography; 2014.33.Colombet J, Sime-Ngando T. Seasonal depth-related gradients in virioplankton: lytic activity and comparison with protistan grazing potential in Lake Pavin (France). Micro Ecol. 2012;64:67–78.
Google Scholar 
34.Colombet J, Sime-Ngando T, Cauchie HM, Fonty G, Hoffmann L, Demeure G. Depth-related gradients of viral activity in Lake Pavin. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72:4440–5.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
35.Brum J, Steward G, Jiang S, Jellison R. Spatial and temporal variability of prokaryotes, viruses, and viral infections of prokaryotes in an alkaline, hypersaline lake. Aquat Micro Ecol. 2005;41:247–60.
Google Scholar 
36.Brum JR, Schenck RO, Sullivan MB. Global morphological analysis of marine viruses shows minimal regional variation and dominance of non-tailed viruses. ISME J. 2013;7:1738–51.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
37.Kauffman KM, Hussain FA, Yang J, Arevalo P, Brown JM, Chang WK, et al. A major lineage of non-tailed dsDNA viruses as unrecognized killers of marine bacteria. Nature. 2018;554:118–22.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
38.Székely AJ, Breitbart M. Single-stranded DNA phages: from early molecular biology tools to recent revolutions in environmental microbiology. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2016;363:27.
Google Scholar 
39.Roux S, Enault F, Hurwitz BL, Sullivan MB. VirSorter: Mining viral signal from microbial genomic data. PeerJ. 2015;2015:e985.
Google Scholar 
40.Hurwitz BL, Sullivan MB. The Pacific Ocean Virome (POV): a marine viral metagenomic dataset and associated protein clusters for quantitative viral ecology. PLoS One. 2013;8:e57355.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
41.Aldunate M, Henríquez-Castillo C, Ji Q, Lueders-Dumont J, Mulholland MR, Ward BB, et al. Nitrogen assimilation in picocyanobacteria inhabiting the oxygen-deficient waters of the eastern tropical North and South Pacific. Limnol Oceanogr. 2020;65:437–53.CAS 

Google Scholar 
42.Solonenko SA, Ignacio-Espinoza JC, Alberti A, Cruaud C, Hallam S, Konstantinidis K, et al. Sequencing platform and library preparation choices impact viral metagenomes. BMC Genom. 2013;14:320.CAS 

Google Scholar 
43.Duhaime MB, Deng L, Poulos BT, Sullivan MB. Towards quantitative metagenomics of wild viruses and other ultra-low concentration DNA samples: a rigorous assessment and optimization of the linker amplification method. Environ Microbiol. 2012;14:2526–37.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
44.Ganesh S, Bristow LA, Larsen M, Sarode N, Thamdrup B, Stewart FJ. Size-fraction partitioning of community gene transcription and nitrogen metabolism in a marine oxygen minimum zone. ISME J. 2015;9:2682–96.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
45.Allen LZ, Allen EE, Badger JH, McCrow JP, Paulsen IT, Elbourne LD, et al. Influence of nutrients and currents on the genomic composition of microbes across an upwelling mosaic. ISME J. 2012;6:1403–14.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
46.Hurwitz BL, U’Ren JM. Viral metabolic reprogramming in marine ecosystems. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2016;31:161–8.47.Breitbart M, Bonnain C, Malki K, Sawaya NA. Phage puppet masters of the marine microbial realm. Nat Microbiol. 2018;3:754–66.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
48.Ignacio-Espinoza JC, Sullivan MB. Phylogenomics of T4 cyanophages: lateral gene transfer in the ‘core’ and origins of host genes. Environ Microbiol. 2012;14:2113–26.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
49.Crummett LT, Puxty RJ, Weihe C, Marston MF, Martiny JBH. The genomic content and context of auxiliary metabolic genes in marine cyanomyoviruses. Virology. 2016;499:219–29.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
50.Sullivan MB, Lindell D, Lee JA, Thompson LR, Bielawski JP, Chisholm SW. Prevalence and evolution of core photosystem II genes in marine cyanobacterial viruses and their hosts. PLoS Biol. 2006;4:e234.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
51.Bragg JG, Chisholm SW. Modeling the fitness consequences of a cyanophage-encoded photosynthesis gene. PLoS One. 2008;3:e3550.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
52.Puxty RJ, Evans DJ, Millard AD, Scanlan DJ. Energy limitation of cyanophage development: implications for marine carbon cycling. ISME J. 2018;12:1273–86.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
53.White AE, Foster RA, Benitez-Nelson CR, Masqué P, Verdeny E, Popp BN, et al. Nitrogen fixation in the Gulf of California and the Eastern Tropical North Pacific. Prog Oceanogr. 2013;109:1–17.
Google Scholar 
54.Jayakumar A, Chang BX, Widner B, Bernhardt P, Mulholland MR, Ward BB. Biological nitrogen fixation in the oxygen-minimum region of the eastern tropical North Pacific ocean. ISME J. 2017;11:2356–67.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
55.Fuchsman CA, Devol AH, Saunders JK, McKay C, Rocap G. Niche partitioning of the N cycling microbial community of an offshore oxygen deficient zone. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:2384.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
56.Zhang Y, Pohlmann EL, Halbleib CM, Ludden PW, Roberts GP. Effect of P(II) and its homolog GlnK on reversible ADP-ribosylation of dinitrogenase reductase by heterologous expression of the Rhodospirillum rubrum dinitrogenase reductase ADP-ribosyl transferase-dinitrogenase reductase-activating glycohydrolase regula. J Bacteriol. 2001;183:1610–20.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
57.Tong W-H. Distinct iron-sulfur cluster assembly complexes exist in the cytosol and mitochondria of human cells. EMBO J. 2000;19:5692–5700.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
58.Py B, Barras F. Building Feg-S proteins: bacterial strategies. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2010;8:436–46.59.Eichhorn E, van der Ploeg JR, Kertesz MA, Leisinger T. Characterization of alpha-ketoglutarate-dependent taurine dioxygenase from Escherichia coli. J Biol Chem. 1997;272:23031–6.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
60.Friedrich CG, Bardischewsky F, Rother D, Quentmeier A, Fischer J. Prokaryotic sulfur oxidation. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2005;8:253–9.61.Anantharaman K, Duhaime MB, Breier JA, Wendt KA, Toner BM, Dick GJ. Sulfur oxidation genes in diverse deep-sea viruses. Science. 2014;344:757 LP–760.
Google Scholar 
62.Callbeck CM, Lavik G, Ferdelman TG, Fuchs B, Gruber-Vodicka HR, Hach PF, et al. Oxygen minimum zone cryptic sulfur cycling sustained by offshore transport of key sulfur oxidizing bacteria. Nat Commun. 2018;9:1729.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
63.Carolan MT, Smith JM, Beman JM. Transcriptomic evidence for microbial sulfur cycling in the eastern tropical North Pacific oxygen minimum zone. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:334.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
64.Ganesh S, Bertagnolli AD, Bristow LA, Padilla CC, Blackwood N, Aldunate M, et al. Single cell genomic and transcriptomic evidence for the use of alternative nitrogen substrates by anammox bacteria. ISME J. 2018;1:2706–22.65.Howard-Varona C, Hargreaves KR, Abedon ST, Sullivan MB. Lysogeny in nature: mechanisms, impact and ecology of temperate phages. ISME J. 2017;11:1511–20.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
66.Lill R, Dutkiewicz R, Elsässer HP, Hausmann A, Netz DJA, Pierik AJ, et al. Mechanisms of iron-sulfur protein maturation in mitochondria, cytosol and nucleus of eukaryotes. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Res. 2006;1763:652–67.67.Fontecave M. Iron-sulfur clusters: ever-expanding roles. Nat Chem Biol. 2006;2:171–4.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
68.Roche B, Aussel L, Ezraty B, Mandin P, Py B, Barras F. Iron/sulfur proteins biogenesis in prokaryotes: formation, regulation and diversity. Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg. 2013;1827:455–69.CAS 

Google Scholar 
69.Xu XM, Møller SG. Iron-sulfur clusters: Biogenesis, molecular mechanisms, and their functional significance. Antioxid Redox Signal. 2011;15:271–307.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
70.Miller HK, Auerbuch V. Bacterial iron-sulfur cluster sensors in mammalian pathogens. Metallomics. 2015;7:943–56.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
71.Sharon I, Battchikova N, Aro E-M, Giglione C, Meinnel T, Glaser F, et al. Comparative metagenomics of microbial traits within oceanic viral communities. ISME J. 2011;5:1178–90.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
72.Loiseau L, Ollagnier-de-Choudens S, Nachin L, Fontecave M, Barras F. Biogenesis of Fe-S cluster by the bacterial suf system. SufS and SufE form a new type of cysteine desulfurase. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:38352–9.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
73.Outten FW, Wood MJ, Muñoz FM, Storz G. The SufE protein and the SufBCD complex enhance SufS cysteine desulfurase activity as part of a sulfur transfer pathway for Fe-S cluster assembly in Escherichia coli. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:45713–9.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
74.Ayala-Castro C, Saini A, Outten FW. Fe-S cluster assembly pathways in bacteria. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2008;72:110–25.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
75.Shepard EM, Boyd ES, Broderick JB, Peters JW. Biosynthesis of complex iron-sulfur enzymes. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2011;15:319–27.76.Lill R. Function and biogenesis of iron–sulphur proteins. Nature. 2009;460:831–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
77.Seidler A, Jaschkowitz K, Wollenberg M. Incorporation of iron-sulphur clusters in membrane-bound proteins. Biochem Soc Trans. 2001;29:418–21.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
78.Buchanan BB, Schürmann P, Wolosiuk RA, Jacquot J-P. The ferredoxin/thioredoxin system: from discovery to molecular structures and beyond. Photosynth Res. 2002;73:215–22.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
79.Dubnau D, Losick R. Bistability in bacteria. Mol Microbiol. 2006;61:564–72.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
80.Resnekov O, Driks A, Losick R. Identification and characterization of sporulation gene spoVS from Bacillus subtilis. J Bacteriol. 1995;177:5628–35.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
81.Sonenshein AL. Bacteriophages: how bacterial spores capture and protect phage DNA. Curr Biol. 2006;16:R14–R16.82.Sullivan MB, Coleman ML, Weigele P, Rohwer F, Chisholm SW. Three Prochlorococcus cyanophage genomes: signature features and ecological interpretations. PLoS Biol. 2005;3:0790–806.CAS 

Google Scholar 
83.Fortier L-C, Sekulovic O. Importance of prophages to evolution and virulence of bacterial pathogens. Virulence. 2013;4:354–65.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
84.Mobberley J, Nathan Authement R, Segall AM, Edwards RA, Slepecky RA, Paul JH. Lysogeny and sporulation in Bacillus isolates from the Gulf of Mexico. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010;76:829–42.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
85.Brüssow H, Canchaya C, Hardt W-D. Phages and the evolution of bacterial pathogens: from genomic rearrangements to lysogenic conversion. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2004;68:560–602.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
86.Meinhart A, Alonso JC, Strater N, Saenger W. Crystal structure of the plasmid maintenance system /: functional mechanism of toxin and inactivation by 2 2 complex formation. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2003;100:1661–6.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
87.Schuster CF, Bertram R. Toxin-antitoxin systems are ubiquitous and versatile modulators of prokaryotic cell fate. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2013;340:73–85.88.Kawano M. Divergently overlapping cis -encoded antisense RNA regulating toxin-antitoxin systems from E. coli. RNA Biol. 2012;9:1520–7.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
89.Smith MA, Bidochka MJ. Bacterial fitness and plasmid-loss: the importance of culture conditions and plasmid size. Can J Microbiol. 1998;44:351–5.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
90.Summers DK. The kinetics of plasmid loss. Trends Biotechnol. 1991;9: 273–8.91.Persad AK, Williams ML, LeJeune JT. Rapid loss of a green fluorescent plasmid in Escherichia coli O157:H7. AIMS Microbiol. 2017;3:872–84.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
92.Modi SR, Lee HH, Spina CS, Collins JJ. Antibiotic treatment expands the resistance reservoir and ecological network of the phage metagenome. Nature. 2013;499:219–22.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
93.Hargreaves KR, Kropinski AM, Clokie MR. Bacteriophage behavioral ecology. Bacteriophage. 2014;4:e29866.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
94.Naught LE, Gilbert S, Imhoff R, Snook C, Beamer L, Tipton P. Allosterism and cooperativity in Pseudomonas aeruginosa GDP-mannose dehydrogenase. Biochemistry. 2002;41:9637–45.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
95.Dong C, Flecks S, Unversucht S, Haupt C, van Pee K-H, Naismith JH. Tryptophan 7-halogenase (PrnA) structure suggests a mechanism for regioselective chlorination. Science. 2005;309:2216–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
96.Fouces R, Mellado E, Diez B, Barredo JL. The tylosin biosynthetic cluster from Streptomyces fradiae: genetic organization of the left region. Microbiology. 1999;145:855–68.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
97.Heacock-Kang Y, Zarzycki-Siek J, Sun Z, Poonsuk K, Bluhm AP, Cabanas D, et al. Novel dual regulators of Pseudomonas aeruginosa essential for productive biofilms and virulence. Mol Microbiol. 2018;109:401–14.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
98.Kurtov D, Kinghorn JR, Unkles SE. The Aspergillus nidulans panB gene encodes ketopantoate hydroxymethyltransferase, required for biosynthesis of pantothenate and Coenzyme A. Mol Gen Genet. 1999;262:115–20.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
99.Huisjes R, Card DJ. Methods for assessment of pantothenic acid (Vitamin B5). In: Harrington D, editor. Laboratory assessment of vitamin status. London, UK; San Diego, CA, USA; Cambridge, MA, USA; Oxford, UK : Elsevier Inc.; 2019. p. 265–299. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-021-01143-1.100.Leonardi R, Jackowski S. Biosynthesis of pantothenic acid and coenzyme A. EcoSal Plus. 2007;2:2.101.Begley TP, Kinsland C, Strauss E. The biosynthesis of coenzyme a in bacteria. Vitam Horm. 2001;61:157–71.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
102.Cameron B, Guilhot C, Blanche F, Cauchois L, Rouyez MC, Rigault S, et al. Genetic and sequence analyses of a Pseudomonas denitrificans DNA fragment containing two cob genes. J Bacteriol. 1991;173:6058–65.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
103.Doxey AC, Kurtz DA, Lynch MD, Sauder LA, Neufeld JD. Aquatic metagenomes implicate Thaumarchaeota in global cobalamin production. ISME J. 2015;9:461–71.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
104.Heal KR, Qin W, Amin SA, Devol AH, Moffett JW, Armbrust EV, et al. Accumulation of NO2-cobalamin in nutrient-stressed ammonia-oxidizing archaea and in the oxygen deficient zone of the eastern tropical North Pacific. Environ Microbiol Rep. 2018;10:453–7.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
105.Vik DR, Roux S, Brum JR, Bolduc B, Emerson JB, Padilla CC, et al. Putative archaeal viruses from the mesopelagic ocean. PeerJ. 2017;5:e3428.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
106.Streisinger G, Emrich J, Stahl MM. Chromosome structure in phage T4, III. Terminal redundancy and length determination. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1967;57:292–5.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
107.Mahmoudabadi G, Milo R, Phillips R. Energetic cost of building a virus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114:E4324–E4333.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
108.Brum J. 5m intervals of CTD profiles from R/V New Horizon cruise NH1315 in the Eastern Tropical North Pacific (ETNP) during June 2013. Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO). (Version 1) Version Date 2020-08-31 (2020). https://doi.org/10.26008/1912/bco-dmo.822818.1.109.Noble RT, Fuhrman JA. Use of SYBR Green I for rapid epifluorescence counts of marine viruses and bacteria. Aquat Micro Ecol. 1998;14:113–8.
Google Scholar 
110.Brum J. Estimated abundances of viruses and bacteria determined in samples collected in the Eastern Tropical North Pacific (ETNP) on R/V New Horizon cruise NH1315 during June 2013. Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO). (Version 1) Version Date 2020-09-02 (2020). https://doi.org/10.26008/1912/bco-dmo.823094.1.111.Binder B. Reconsidering the relationship between vitally induced bacterial mortality and frequency of infected cells. Aquat Micro Ecol. 1999;18:207–15.
Google Scholar 
112.Brum J. Estimated frequency of lytic viral infection from samples collected in the Eastern Tropical North Pacific oxygen minimum zone region (ETNP OMZ) on R/V New Horizon cruise NH1315 during June 2013. Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO). (Version 1) Version Date 2020-09-01 (2020). https://doi.org/10.26008/1912/bco-dmo.822914.1.113.Abramoff MD, Magalhaes PJ, Ram SJ. Image processing with ImageJ. Biophotonics Int 2004;11:36–42.114.Brum J. Morphotypes, capsid widths, and tail lengths of viruses from samples collected in the Eastern Tropical North Pacific oxygen minimum zone region (ETNP OMZ) on R/V New Horizon cruise NH1315 during June 2013. Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO). (Version 1) Version Date 2020-09-02 (2020). https://doi.org/10.26008/1912/bco-dmo.823131.1.115.John SG, Mendez CB, Deng L, Poulos B, Kauffman AKM, Kern S, et al. A simple and efficient method for concentration of ocean viruses by chemical flocculation. Environ Microbiol Rep. 2011;3:195–202.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
116.Duhaime MB, Sullivan MB. Ocean viruses: Rigorously evaluating the metagenomic sample-to-sequence pipeline. Virology. 2012;434:181–6.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
117.Brum J. Accession numbers of viral metagenomes from samples collected in the Eastern Tropical North Pacific oxygen minimum zone region (ETNP OMZ) on R/V New Horizon cruise NH1315 during June 2013. Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO). (Version 1) Version Date 2020-09-04 (2020) https://doi.org/10.26008/1912/bco-dmo.823295.1.118.Peng Y, Leung HCM, Yiu SM, Chin FYL. IDBA-UD: A de novo assembler for single-cell and metagenomic sequencing data with highly uneven depth. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:1420–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
119.Delcher AL, Salzberg SL, Phillippy AM. Using MUMmer to identify similar regions in large sequence sets. Curr Protoc Bioinforma. 2003; Chapter 10: Unit 10.3.120.Finn RD, Bateman A, Clements J, Coggill P, Eberhardt RY, Eddy SR, et al. Pfam: the protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:D222–D230.121.Eddy SR. Accelerated profile HMM searches. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011;7:1002195.
Google Scholar 
122.Team RCR. A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2018.123.Wickham H. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York: 2016.124.Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.5-2. 2013 http://RForge.R-project.org/projects/vegan/.125.Wilkinson L. venneuler: Venn and Euler diagrams. R package version 1.1-0. 2011 https://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=venneuler.126.Harrell FE, With contributions from Charles Dupont and many others. Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous. R package version 4.3-0. 2019 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Hmisc.127.Wei T, Simko V. R package “corrplot”: Visualization of a Correlation Matrix (Version 0.84). 2017. Available from https://github.com/taiyun/corrplot.128.Emerson JB, Roux S, Brum JR, Bolduc B, Woodcroft BJ, Jang H Bin, et al. Host-linked soil viral ecology along a permafrost thaw gradient. Nat Microbiol. 2018;3:870–80.129.Sturges HA. The choice of a class interval. J Am Stat Assoc. 1926;21:65–66.130.Suzuki R, Shimodaira H. Pvclust: an R package for assessing the uncertainty in hierarchical clustering. Bioinformatics. 2006;22:1540–2.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar  More

Insects and bacteriaBean bugs were reared in petri dishes (90 mm in diameter and 20-mm high) at 25 °C under a long-day regimen (16-h light, 8-h dark) and fed with soybean seeds and distilled water containing 0.05% ascorbic acid (DWA). Burkholderia symbiont strain SFA119, a MEP-degrading strain conferring MEP resistant in the bean bug, and its GFP-(green fluorescent protein) labeled derivative, strain SJ586, were used in this study. The symbiont was cultured at 30 °C on YG medium (0.5% yeast extract, 0.4% glucose, and 0.1% NaCl). The GFP-labeled strain was constructed by the Tn7 mini-transposon system, as previously described31.Genome sequencingDNA was extracted from cultured cells of strain SFA1 by the phenol–chloroform extraction as previously described32. The DNA library for Illumina short reads (the mean insert size: 500 bp) was constructed by using the Covaris S2 ultrasonicator (Covaris) and the KAPA HyperPrep Kit (Kapa Biosystems). For the library construction for Nanopore long reads, Native Barcoding Expansion (EXP-NBD104, Oxford Nanopore Technologies) and the Ligation Sequencing Kit (SQK-LSK109, Oxford Nanopore Technologies) were used. The genome sequencing was performed with NextSeq using the 2 × 151-bp protocol (Illumina) and GridION using an R9.4.1 flow cell (Oxford Nanopore Technologies). The Illumina short reads were processed by using Sickle Ver 1.33 (available at https://github.com/najoshi/sickle) for removing the low-quality and shorter reads. After processing the Nanopore long-reads with Porechop Ver 0.2.3 (available at https://github.com/rrwick/Porechop) and Filtlong Ver 0.2.0 (available at https://github.com/rrwick/Filtlong), error correction was performed by using Canu Ver 1.833. These processed short- and long reads were assembled by using Unicycler Ver 0.4.734, resulting in the eight circular replicons (Supplementary Fig. 1). The assembled genome was annotated by DFAST Ver 1.1.035. After the homology searches of the protein sequences by blastp 2.5.0 + 36 against the COG database (PMID: 25428365), circular replicons were visualized with circos v 0.69-837. The chromosomes and plasmids were assigned according to the genome of Caballeronia (Burkholderia) cordobensis strain YI2338.Phylogenetic analysisNucleotide sequences of 16 S rRNA gene of representative Burkholderia spp. and outgroup species were aligned by using SINA v1.2.1139. Protein sequences of MEP-degrading genes (mpd, pnpB, and mhqA) and a plasmid-transfer gene (traH) on plasmid 2 were subjected to the blastp search against the nr database (downloaded in Jul. 2019) and top ~30 hit sequences were retrieved for each gene. Multiple sequencing alignments of each gene were constructed with L-INS-I of mafft v7.40740. Gap-including and ambiguous sites in the alignments were then removed. Unrooted maximum-likelihood (ML) phylogenetic trees were reconstructed with RAxML v8.2.341 using the GTR + Γ model (for 16 S rRNA gene) or the LG + Γ model42 (for other genes). The bootstrap values of 1000 replicates for all internal branches were calculated with a rapid bootstrapping algorithm43.Preparation of SFA1 cultures for RNA-seqBurkholderia symbiont SFA1 was precultured in minimal medium (20 mM phosphate buffer [pH 7.0], 0.01% yeast, 0.1% (NH4)2SO4, 0.02% NaCl, 0.01% MgSO4⋅7H2O, 0.005% CaCl2⋅2H2O, 0.00025% FeSO4⋅7H2O, and 0.00033% EDTA⋅2Na) containing 1.0 mM of MEP on a gyratory shaker (210 rpm) at 30 °C overnight, and subcultured in newly prepared MEP-containing minimal medium under the same conditions for 5 h. As a control, SFA1 was precultured in minimal medium containing 0.1% citrate overnight, and then the overnighter was subcultured in a newly prepared citrate-containing minimal medium under the same conditions for 10 h. The culture was mixed with an equal amount of RNAprotect Bacteria Regent (Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA), then centrifuged to harvest the cells for the RNA-seq analysis.Preparation of midgut symbiont cells for RNA-seqThe oral administration of the symbiont strain SFA1 was performed as described19,44. The symbiont was inoculated to 2nd instar nymphs, and three days after molting to the 3rd instar, nymphs were transdermally administered with 1 µl of 0.2 µM or 20 µM of MEP (dissolved in acetone). One- or three days after the treatment, insects were dissected and the crypt-bearing symbiotic gut region was subjected to the RNA extraction and RNA-seq analysis. As a control, untreated insects were analyzed.RNA-seq analysisTotal RNA was extracted from triplicate samples from cultures by the hot-phenol method as previously described45 or from the midgut symbiont cells by using RNAiso Plus (Takara Bi, Kusatsu, Shiga, Japan) and the RNeasy mini kit (Qiagen). The extracted total RNA was purified by phenol–chloroform extraction and digestion by DNase (RQ1 RNase-Free DNase, Promega, Fitchburg, WI, USA) and repurified by using a RNeasy Mini Kit. The mRNA in the samples was further enriched by the RiboMinus Transcriptome Isolation Kit bacteria (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and the RiboMinus Eukaryote Kit for RNA-Seq (Thermo Fisher Scientific), and purified by using an AMPure XP kit (Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA, USA). The cDNA libraries were constructed from approximately 100 ng of rRNA-depleted RNA samples by the use of a NextUltraRNA library prep kit (New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA, USA). Size selection of cDNA (200–300 bp) and determination of the size distribution and concentration of the purified cDNA samples were performed as described previously46. In total, 21 cDNA libraries were constructed and sequenced by MiSeq (Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). To ensure high sequence quality, the remaining sequencing adapters and the reads with a cutoff Phred score of 15 (for leading and tailing sequences, Phred score of >20) and a length of less than 80 bp in the obtained RNA-seq data were removed by the program Trimmomatic v0.30 using Illumina TruSeq3 adapter sequences for the clipping47. The remaining paired reads were analyzed by FastQC version 0.11.9 (http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/) for quality control, and Bowtie2 ver. 2.2.248 for mapping on the symbiont genome (DDBJ/EMBL/GenBank accession: AP022305–AP022312). After the conversion of the output BAM files to BED files using the bamtobed program in BEDTools ver. 2.14.349, gene expression levels were calculated in TPM (transcripts per kilobase million) values by using in-house scripts46.Gene deletion and complementationMEP-degrading genes (mpd, pnpA1, and pnpA2) were deleted by the homologous-recombination-based deletion method using pK18mobsacB or pUC18, as previously described50,51. Primers used for the mutagenesis are listed in Supplementary Table 1. For mpd gene deletion, pK18mobsacB was used to construct a markerless mutant. For single deletion of pnpA1 and pnpA2 genes, pUC18 was used to substitute each gene locus with a kanamycin-resistance gene cassette. The double deletion of pnpA1 and pnpA2 genes was performed by substituting pnpA2 gene locus with a tetracycline-resistance gene cassette in the pnpA1-deletion mutant. Gene complementation of mpd was also performed by homologous recombination using plasmid pUC18 with primers listed in Supplementary Table 1. To investigate growth profiles of the wild-type SFA1, the gene-deletion mutants (Δmpd, ΔpnpA1, ΔpnpA2, and ΔpnpA1/ΔpnpA2), and the mph-complement mutant (Δmpd/mpd+) in the MEP-containing minimal medium, the strains were precultured in minimal medium containing 1.0 mM MEP on a gyratory shaker (210 rpm) at 30 °C overnight, and then cultured in newly prepared MEP-containing minimal medium under the same condition. The growth of cultures was estimated by OD600 measurements. To confirm the basic growth abilities of the mutants, these bacterial strains were pre- and subcultured in minimal medium containing 0.1% glucose under the same conditions. These symbiont strains and mutants were inoculated to the bean bug as described above.Quantitative PCRSymbiont titers in the midgut crypts were evaluated by quantitative PCR (qPCR) of bacterial dnaA gene copies. The qPCR was performed by using a KAPA SYBR Fast qPCR Master Mix (Kapa Biosystems) and the LightCycler 96 System (Roche Applied Science) with the following primers: BSdnaA–F (5′-AGC GCG AGA TCA GAC GGT CGT CGA T-3′) and BSdnaA–R (5′-TCC GGC AAG TCG CGC ACG CA-3′).MEP treatment of insectsMEP treatment of R. pedestris was performed as previously described19. Soybean seeds were dipped in 0.2 mM MEP for 5 s and dried at room temperature. In each clean plastic container, 15 individuals of 3rd-instar nymphs were reared on three seeds of the MEP-treated soybean and DWA at 25 °C under the long-day regime, and the number of dead insects was counted 24 h after the treatments. The survival rate of the insects was analyzed under Fisher’s exact test by use of the program R ver. 3.6.3 (available at https://www.R-project.org/). Multiple comparisons were corrected by the Bonferroni method.Bactericidal activities of MEP and its degradation product 3M4NTo measure bactericidal activities of MEP and 3M4N on cultured cells of SFA1, 104 cells of log-phase growing bacteria were mixed with a defined concentration of MEP or 3M4N, and spotted on a YG agar plate. To measure the bactericidal activity against midgut crypt-colonizing cells, the symbiotic organs infected with SFA1 were dissected from 3rd-instar insects, homogenized in PBS, and purified by a 5-µm-size pore Syringe filter to harvest colonizing symbiont cells50. MEP or 3M4N was added to approximately 104 cells of the harvested cells and spotted on a YG agar plate. Bactericidal activities of the chemical compounds were then checked in 24 h after incubation at 30 °C.HPLC detection of in vitro and in vivo MEP-degrading activities of the symbiontTo determine in vitro MEP-degradation activity, cultured cells of SFA1 were prepared as above, and 106 cells were incubated at 25 °C in 200 µl of MEP solution (2 mM MEP in Tris-Hcl [pH 8.5] with 0.1% Triton X-100) in a 1.5-ml microtube. To determine in vivo MEP-degradation activity, the midgut of a 5th-instar insect infected with SFA1 was dissected, the posterior and anterior parts of the crypt-bearing symbiotic region were closed with 0.2-mm polyethylene fishline (Supplementary Fig. 6a), and incubated at 25 °C in 200 µl of the MEP solution. For the in vivo determination, 250 mM of trehalose, known as a major sugar source of insects’ hemolymph52, was added to the MEP solution to keep the tissue fresh. After incubation for different times, the reaction was stopped by adding 400 µl of methanol. After centrifugation, supernatants were subjected to high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analyses to detect MEP and 3M4N, as previously reported21, and precipitated cells and tissues were subjected to DNA extraction and qPCR to estimate symbiont-cell numbers of each reaction.LC–ESI–MS detection of 3M4N in feces from 3M4N-fed insectsAn insect-rearing system for feeding 3M4N and collecting feces is shown in Supplementary Fig. 7. Insects were fed with DW or DW containing 10 mM 3M4N in a plastic container, in which the solution supplier was covered by 0.5-mm mesh, so that insects were able to drink the solution by probing with their proboscis, but did not directly touch the solution by their legs or body. Twenty insects were reared per container and their feces were accumulated on the bottom of the container for five days. The collected feces (DW- or 3M4N-treated) were suspended in 1 ml of MilliQ water, and the water-soluble fractions were extracted by thorough vortexing. Solids and insoluble fractions were removed from the suspension by centrifugation and subsequent filtration using a cellulose-acetate membrane (Φ, 0.20 μm, ADVANTEC, Tokyo, Japan). The resultant fraction was diluted 10-fold by MilliQ water and analyzed by liquid chromatography–electrospray-ionization mass spectrometry (LC–ESI–MS) according to a previous report53,54,55. HPLC was performed using the Nexera X2 system (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) composed of LC-30AD pump, SPD-M30A photodiode-array detector, and SIL-30AC autosampler. Develosil HB ODS-UG column (ID 2.0 mm × L 75 mm, Nomura Chemical Co., Ltd, Aichi, Japan) was employed with a flow rate of 0.2 mL/min. The following gradient system was used for analysis of metabolites: MilliQ water (solvent A) and methanol (solvent B), 90% A and 10% B at 0–5 min, linear gradient from 90% A and 10% B to 20% A and 80% B at 5–15 min, 20% A and 80% B at 15–20 min, and 90% A and 10% B at 20–25 min. Retention time of 3M4N standard reagent was 14.2 min. Electrospray-ionization mass spectrometry (ESI–MS) in positive and negative ion modes was simultaneously performed using amaZon SL (Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA). 3M4N (MW = 153.14) standard showed a clear peak in negative mode at m/z of 151.53.Reporting summaryFurther information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article. More

Nature Video
05 November 2021

Whale-cams reveal how much they really eat

Baleen whales consume twice as much krill as previously estimated.

Sara Reardon

0

Sara Reardon

Sara Reardon is a freelance writer in Bozeman, Montana.

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Share on Twitter
Share on Twitter

Share on Facebook
Share on Facebook

Share via E-Mail
Share via E-Mail

Tagging whales with cameras and sensors has allowed researchers to calculate how much food these huge creatures are consuming. It’s the most accurate estimate yet and reveals an even more significant impact of whales on ocean ecosystems than was previously known.Read the paper here.

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03026-z

Related Articles

Vikings were living in North America exactly a thousand years ago

Strange patterns could be the world’s oldest animal fossil

Divers are replanting reefs one coral at a time

How cuttlefish wear their thoughts on their skin

Swimming shrimp: Causing a stir

Subjects

Zoology

Ecology

Environmental sciences

Latest on:

Zoology

Sponge cells hint at origins of nervous system
News 05 NOV 21

Baby bats try out their ‘sonar’ just after birth
Research Highlight 27 OCT 21

Ivory hunting drives evolution of tuskless elephants
News 21 OCT 21

Ecology

Whales’ gigantic appetites, climate fears — the week in infographics
News 05 NOV 21

COP26 climate pledges: What scientists think so far
News 05 NOV 21

Baleen whale prey consumption based on high-resolution foraging measurements
Article 03 NOV 21

Environmental sciences

Carbon implications of marginal oils from market-derived demand shocks
Article 03 NOV 21

For NGOs, article-processing charges sap conservation funds
Correspondence 02 NOV 21

Embrace open-source sensors for local climate studies
Correspondence 02 NOV 21

Jobs

Postdoctoral Training Fellow

Francis Crick Institute
London, United Kingdom

Head of GeMS

Francis Crick Institute
London, United Kingdom

Postdoctoral scientist (m/f/div) to work on the comparative genomics of gutless marine oligochaetes

Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology
Bremen, Germany

Postdoctoral Positions (m/f/div) in Protist Virology

Max Planck Institute for Medical Research (MPIMF)
Heidelberg, Germany More

NEWS
05 November 2021

COP26 climate pledges: What scientists think so far

Nations have promised to end deforestation, curb methane emissions and stop public investment in coal power. Researchers warn that the real work of COP26 is yet to come.

Ehsan Masood

&

Jeff Tollefson

Ehsan Masood

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Jeff Tollefson

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Share on Twitter
Share on Twitter

Share on Facebook
Share on Facebook

Share via E-Mail
Share via E-Mail

Methane burns at an oil pit. Among the key pledges so far at COP26 is an agreement to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030.Credit: Orjan F. Ellingvag/Corbis via Getty

The first few days of the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) have seen a flurry of announcements from world leaders promising to tackle climate change — from plans to phase out public finance for coal-fired power, to a pledge to end deforestation. This year, many big names — including US President Joe Biden and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi — attended the first two days of the conference to make big announcements.
COP26 climate summit: A scientists’ guide to a momentous meeting
This is different from what has happened at most previous COP summits, says Beth Martin, a specialist in climate negotiation who is part of RINGO (Research and Independent Non-Governmental Organizations), a network of organizations allowed to observe the COP26 negotiations. Usually, the highest-profile figures aren’t present during the first week, but arrive near the end of the meeting to help bridge differences in time for an agreed statement, and for the obligatory ‘UN family photo’.Nature asked researchers what they think of the pledges that have been made so far, as negotiators from some 200 countries prepare to dive into more detailed talks.Methane emissionsOne of the key developments in the first week was an agreement to curb emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that is second only to carbon dioxide in terms of its impact on the climate. Led by the United States and the European Union, the global methane pledge seeks to curb methane emissions by 30% by 2030, and has been signed by more than 100 countries.
Control methane to slow global warming — fast
“Obviously, as a scientist you’d say, ‘Well, a 50% reduction in the methane emissions by 2030 would be even better,’ but it’s a good start,” says Tim Lenton, who heads the Global Systems Institute at the University of Exeter, UK. “It’s an additional lever that could really help us limit warming.”Research has shown1 that curbing methane emissions using existing technologies could shave up to 0.5 °C off global temperatures by 2100. As with carbon dioxide, however, limiting methane emissions will not happen on its own.With his climate agenda facing challenges in Congress, Biden made methane a centrepiece of his commitments in Glasgow by announcing a new regulation to curb methane emissions from the oil and gas industry. Put forward this week by the US Environmental Protection Agency, the rule would require companies to curb methane emissions from their facilities by 74% over the coming decade, compared with 2005 levels. If implemented as proposed, it could prevent the release of some 37 million tonnes of methane by 2035 — equivalent to more than the annual carbon emissions from the nation’s fleets of passenger vehicles and commercial aircraft.India’s net-zero goalAfter delaying expected updates to India’s climate commitments by more than a year, Modi captured the world’s attention early in the summit by announcing that his country would seek to achieve net-zero emissions by 2070. The deadline is decades after that of many other countries that have made net-zero commitments, and it remains unclear whether India is committing to curbing just carbon dioxide emissions, or the broader category of greenhouse-gas emissions. But scientists say the announcement could mark a significant step forward if India follows through.
Scientists cheer India’s ambitious carbon-zero climate pledge
“We are definitely taken by surprise: this is much more than we were expecting to hear,” says Ulka Kelkar, an economist in Bengaluru who heads the Indian climate programme for the World Resources Institute, an environmental think tank based in Washington DC.Many scientists remain sceptical about mid-century net-zero pledges, in part because it’s easy to make long-term promises but hard to make the difficult short-term decisions that are required to meet those pledges. But India’s commitment includes measurable near-term targets, such as a pledge to provide 50% of the nation’s power through renewable resources and to reduce projected carbon emissions by one billion tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2030.Questions remain about how these targets will be defined and measured, but models indicate that there is a 50% chance such net-zero pledges could limit global warming to 2 °C or less, if fully implemented by all countries.

More than 130 countries have agreed to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030.Credit: Joao Laet/AFP via Getty

Climate cashAmong a cascade of climate-finance announcements this week is a pledge from more than 450 organizations in the financial sector — including banks, fund managers and insurance companies — in 45 countries to move US$130 trillion of funds under their control into investments where the recipient is committed to net-zero emissions by 2050.The pledging institutions, which are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, have not yet specified interim targets or timetables to achieve this goal. On 1 November, UN secretary-general António Guterres announced that a group of independent experts would be convened to propose standards for such commitments to net-zero emissions.
The broken $100-billion promise of climate finance – and how to fix it
Governments also announced new investments in clean technologies. And more than 40 countries, including the United Kingdom, Poland, South Korea and Vietnam, have committed to phasing out coal power in the 2030s (for major economies) or 2040s (globally), and to stopping public funding for new coal-fired power plants.“All of this is significant,” says Cristián Samper, an ecologist and president of the Wildlife Conservation Society in New York City. “The involvement of the financial sector and of ministers of finance and energy” in the meeting “is a game-changer”.However, the announcements have been overshadowed by governments’ failure to meet a 2009 pledge to provide $100 billion annually in climate finance for low- and middle-income countries by 2020. Reports suggest that it will take another two years to reach this goal, and that around 70% of the finance will be provided as loans.“We all assumed it would be grant finance. We didn’t pay attention to the fine print or expect that developed countries would hide behind loans,” says climate economist Tariq Banuri, a former director of sustainable development at the UN.Ending deforestationMore than 130 countries have pledged to halt and reverse forest-loss and land degradation by 2030. The signatories, which include Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Indonesia, are home to 90% of the world’s forests.It is not the first such commitment: the 2014 New York Declaration on Forests, signed by a broad coalition of nearly 200 countries, regional governments, companies, indigenous groups and others, called for halving deforestation by 2020 and “striving” to end it by 2030.
The United Nations must get its new biodiversity targets right
There is also a long-standing UN pledge to slow down and eventually reverse the loss of biodiversity. But this remains unfulfilled and there is no official monitoring. Researchers say the latest target is unlikely to be met without an enforcement mechanism.Separately, a group of high-income countries has pledged $12 billion in public finance for forest protection between 2021 and 2025, but has not specified how the funding will be provided. A statement from the group, which includes Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and EU countries, says governments will “work closely with the private sector” to “leverage vital funding from private sources to deliver change at scale”. This suggests that the finance is likely to be dominated by loans. Still, Samper says that there are reasons to be optimistic. Few previous climate COPs discussed nature and forests on the scale now seen in Glasgow. In the past, if biodiversity was mentioned at a climate meeting, “it was like the Martians had landed”, he says, because biodiversity and climate are treated as separate challenges by the UN. “We’ve never seen this much attention. It could be a pivot point.”

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03034-z

References1.Ocko, I. B. et al. Environ. Res. Lett. 16, 054042 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Download references

Related Articles

COP26 climate summit: A scientists’ guide to a momentous meeting

Scientists cheer India’s ambitious carbon-zero climate pledge

The broken $100-billion promise of climate finance – and how to fix it

The United Nations must get its new biodiversity targets right

Control methane to slow global warming — fast

Subjects

Funding

Biodiversity

Politics

Climate change

Latest on:

Funding

The African Academy of Sciences is in crisis — responsibility must be shared
Editorial 03 NOV 21

UK research funding to grow slower than hoped
News 28 OCT 21

The high burden of infectious disease
Nature Index 27 OCT 21

Biodiversity

The answer to the biodiversity crisis is not more debt
Editorial 26 OCT 21

Illegal mining in the Amazon hits record high amid Indigenous protests
News 30 SEP 21

Fine-root traits in the global spectrum of plant form and function
Article 29 SEP 21

Politics

All aboard the climate train! Scientists join activists for COP26 trip
News 02 NOV 21

Top climate scientists are sceptical that nations will rein in global warming
News Feature 01 NOV 21

UK research funding to grow slower than hoped
News 28 OCT 21

Jobs

Postdoctoral Training Fellow

Francis Crick Institute
London, United Kingdom

Head of GeMS

Francis Crick Institute
London, United Kingdom

Postdoctoral scientist (m/f/div) to work on the comparative genomics of gutless marine oligochaetes

Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology
Bremen, Germany

Postdoctoral Positions (m/f/div) in Protist Virology

Max Planck Institute for Medical Research (MPIMF)
Heidelberg, Germany More

1.Frankham, R., Ballou, J. D. & Briscoe, D. A. Introduction to Conservation Genetics 617 (Cambridge University Press, 2002).Book 

Google Scholar 
2.Spielman, D., Brook, B. W. & Frankham, R. Most species are not driven to extinction before genetic factors impact them. PNAS 101, 15261–15264 (2004).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Ahmadi, M. et al. Evolutionary applications of phylo-genetically-informed ecological niche modelling (ENM) to explore cryptic diversification over cryptic refugia. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 127, 712–722 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Ashrafzadeh, M. R. et al. Large-scale mitochondrial DNA analysis reveals new light on the phylogeography of Central and Eastern-European Brown hare (Lepus europaeus Pallas, 1778). PLoS ONE 13, e0204653 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
5.Tóth, B. et al. Genetic diversity and structure of common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.) in the Centre of Carpathian Basin: Implications for conservation. Genes 11, 1268 (2020).PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
6.Broquet, T., Ray, N., Petit, E., Fryxell, J. M. & Burel, F. Genetic isolation by distance and landscape connectivity in the American marten (Martes americana). Landsc. Ecol. 21, 877–889 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Cushman, S. A., McKelvey, K. S., Hayden, J. & Schwartz, M. K. Gene flow in complex landscapes: testing multiple hypotheses with causal modeling. Am. Nat. 168, 486–499 (2006).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Khosravi, R. et al. Effect of landscape features on genetic structure of the goitered gazelle (Gazella subgutturosa) in Central Iran. Conserv. Genet. 19, 323–336 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Adavodi, R., Khosravi, R., Cushman, S. A. & Kaboli, M. Topographical features and forest cover influence landscape connectivity and gene flow of the Caucasian pit viper, Gloydius caucasicus (Nikolsky, 1916), Iran. Landsc. Ecol. 34, 2615–2630 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Moussy, C. et al. Migration and dispersal patterns of bats and their influence on genetic structure. Mammal Rev. 43, 183–195 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Theodoridis, S. et al. Evolutionary history and past climate change shape the distribution of genetic diversity in terrestrial mammals. Nat. Commun. 11, 1–11 (2020).MathSciNet 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
12.Barilani, M. et al. Detecting introgressive hybridisation in rock partridge populations (Alectoris graeca) in Greece through Bayesian admixture analyses of multilocus genotypes. Conserv. Genet. 8, 343–354 (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Randi, E. Detecting hybridization between wild species and their domesticated relatives. Mol. Ecol. 17, 285–293 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Kusza, S., Ashrafzadeh, M. R., Tóth, B. & Jávor, A. Maternal genetic variation in the northeastern Hungarian fallow deer (Dama dama) population. Mamm. Biol. 93, 21–28 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Laikre, L., Schwartz, M. K., Waples, R. S., Ryman, N. & GeM Working Group. Compromising genetic diversity in the wild: Unmonitored large-scale release of plants and animals. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 520–529 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Söderquist, P. et al. Admixture between released and wild game birds: a changing genetic landscape in European mallards (Anas platyrhynchos). Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 63, 98 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Robertson, P. A. et al. Pheasant release in Great Britain: Long-term and large-scale changes in the survival of a managed bird. Eur. J. Wildlife Res. 63, 100 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Mank, J. E., Carlson, J. E. & Brittingham, M. C. A century of hybridization: Decreasing genetic distance between American black ducks and mallards. Conserv. Genet. 5, 395–403 (2004).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Blanco-Aguiar, J. A. et al. Assessment of game restocking contributions to anthropogenic hybridization: The case of the Iberian red-legged partridge. Anim. Conserv. 11, 535–545 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Sanchez-Donoso, I. et al. Are farm-reared quails for game restocking really common quails (Coturnix coturnix)? a genetic approach. PLoS ONE 7, e39031 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Liu, Y. et al. Genome assembly of the common pheasant Phasianus colchicus: A model for speciation and ecological genomics. Genome Biol. Evol. 11, 3326–3331 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
22.Braasch, T., Pes, T., Michel, S. & Jacken, H. The subspecies of the common pheasant Phasianus colchicus in the wild and captivity. Int. J. Galliformes Conserv. 2, 6–13 (2011).
Google Scholar 
23.Robertson, D. H. P. & Hill, D. A. The Pheasant: Ecology, Management and Conservation 281 (Blackwell Scientific Publication, 1988).
Google Scholar 
24.Hill, D. A. & Robertson, P. Hand reared pheasants: how do they compare with wild birds. Game Conserv. Ann. Rep. 17, 76–84 (1986).
Google Scholar 
25.Pfarr, J. True Pheasants: A Noble Quarry 248 (Hancock House Publishers Ltd, 2012).
Google Scholar 
26.BirdLife International. Phasianus colchicus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T45100023A85926819. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T45100023A85926819.en27.Ashoori, A. et al. Habitat modeling of the common pheasant Phasianus colchicus (Galliformes: Phasianidae) in a highly modified landscape: application of species distribution models in the study of a poorly documented bird in Iran. Eur. Zool. J. 85, 372–380 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. Handbook of the Birds of the World: New World Vultures to Guineafowl Vol. 2, 638 (Lynx Edicions, 1994).
Google Scholar 
29.Boev, Z. N. Late Pleistocene and Holocene avifauna from three caves in the vicinity of Tran (Pernik District-W Bulgaria). In Proceedings of the First National Conference on Environment and Cultural Heritage in Karst, Sofia, Bulgaria, 10–12 November 2000 (eds Delchev, P. et al.) (Earth and Man National Museum, Association of Environment and Cultural Heritage in Karst, 2001).
Google Scholar 
30.Qu, H. et al. Subspecies boundaries and recent evolution history of the common pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) across China. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 71, 155–162 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Kayvanfar, N., Aliabadian, M., Niu, X., Zhang, Z. & Liu, Y. Phylogeography of the common pheasant Phasianus colchicus. Ibis 159, 430–442 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Todesco, M. et al. Hybridization and extinction. Evol. Appl. 9, 892–908 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Santilli, F. & Bagliacca, M. Factors influencing pheasant Phasianus colchicus harvesting in Tuscany, Italy. Wildl. Biol. 14, 281–287 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Lavadinović, V., Beuković, D. & Popović, Z. Common Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus L.1758) management in Serbia. Contemp. Agric. 68, 71–79 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Fenberg, P. B. & Roy, K. Ecological and evolutionary consequences of size-selective harvesting: How much do we know?. Mol. Ecol. 17, 209–220 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Allendorf, F. W. & Hard, J. J. Human-induced evolution caused by unnatural selection through harvest of wild animals. PNAS 106, 9987–9994 (2009).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Darimont, C. T. et al. Human predators outpace other agents of trait change in the wild. PNAS 106, 952–954 (2009).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Madden, J. R. & Whiteside, M. A. Selection on behavioural traits during ‘unselective’harvesting means that shy pheasants better survive a hunting season. Anim. Behav. 87, 129–135 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Csányi, S. The effect of hand-reared pheasants on the wild population in Hungary: A modelling approach. Hung. Small Game B. 5, 71–82 (2000).
Google Scholar 
40.Queirós, J., Gortázar, C. & Alves, P. C. Deciphering anthropogenic effects on the genetic background of the Red deer in the Iberian Peninsula. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8, 147 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Giesel, J. T., Brazeau, D., Koppelman, R. & Shiver, D. Ring-necked pheasant population genetic structure. J. Wildl. Manag. 61, 1332–1338 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Qu, J., Liu, N., Bao, X. & Wang, X. Phylogeography of the ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) in China. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 52, 125–132 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Liu, Y., Zhan, X., Wang, N., Chang, J. & Zhang, Z. Effect of geological vicariance on mitochondrial DNA differentiation in Common Pheasant populations of the Loess Plateau and eastern China. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 55, 409–417 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Zhang, L., An, B., Backström, N. & Liu, N. Phylogeography-based delimitation of subspecies boundaries in the Common Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus). Biochem. Genet. 52, 38–51 (2014).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
45.Liu, S. et al. Regional drivers of diversification in the late Quaternary in a widely distributed generalist species, the common pheasant Phasianus colchicus. J. Biogeogr. 47, 2714–2727 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Avise, J. C. Phylogeography: The History and Formation of Species 464 (Harvard University Press, 2000).Book 

Google Scholar 
47.Corin, S. E., Lester, P. J., Abbott, K. L. & Ritchie, P. A. Inferring historical introduction pathways with mitochondrial DNA: the case of introduced Argentine ants (Linepithema humile) into New Zealand. Divers. Distrib. 13, 510–518 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Oskarsson, M. C. et al. Mitochondrial DNA data indicate an introduction through Mainland Southeast Asia for Australian dingoes and Polynesian domestic dogs. Proc. R. Soc. B. 279, 967–974 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Garrett, L. J. et al. Spatio-temporal processes drive fine-scale genetic structure in an otherwise panmictic seabird population. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–12 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
50.Brito, P. H. Contrasting patterns of mitochondrial and microsatellite genetic structure among Western European populations of tawny owls (Strix aluco). Mol. Ecol. 16, 3423–3437 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Suárez, N. M. et al. Phylogeography and genetic struc-ture of the Canarian common chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs) inferred with mtDNA and microsatellite loci. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 53, 556–564 (2009).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
52.Piry, S., Luikart, G. & Cornuet, J. M. Computer note. BOTTLENECK: A computer program for detecting recent reductions in the effective size using allele frequency data. J. Hered. 90, 502–503 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Rogers, A. R. & Harpending, H. Population growth makes waves in the distribution of pairwise genetic differences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 9, 552–569 (1992).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
54.Slatkin, M. & Hudson, R. R. Pairwise comparisons of mitochondrial DNA sequences in stable and exponentially growing populations. Genetics 129, 555–562 (1991).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Wang, B. et al. Development and characterization of novel microsatellite markers for the Common Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) using RAD-seq. Avian Res. 8, 4 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Grant, W. A. S. & Bowen, B. W. Shallow population histories in deep evolutionary lineages of marine fishes: Insights from sardines and anchovies and lessons for conservation. J. Hered. 89, 415–426 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Barrowclough, G. F., Johnson, N. K. & Zink, R. M. In Current Ornithology Vol. 2 (ed. Johnston, R. F.) 135–154 (Springer, 1985).Chapter 

Google Scholar 
58.Zink, R. M. Phylogeographic studies of North American birds. In Avian Molecular Evolution and Systematics (ed. Mindell, D. P.) 301–324 (Academic Press, 1997).Chapter 

Google Scholar 
59.Payne, R. B. Natal dispersal and population structure in a migratory songbird, the Indigo Bunting. Evolution 45, 49–62 (1991).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Stenzel, L. E. et al. Long-distance breeding dispersal of snowy plovers in western North America. J. Anim. Ecol. 63, 887–902 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Zhu, C. et al. Genetic structure and population dynamics of the silver pheasant (Lophura nycthemera) in southern China. Turk. J. Zool. 44, 31–43 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Faragó, S. Élőhelyfejlesztés az Apróvad-Gazdálkodásban: A Fenntartható Apróvad-Gazdálkodás Környezeti Alapjai 341 (Mezőgazda Kiadó, 1997).
Google Scholar 
63.Faragó, S. & Náhlik, A. A Vadállomány Szabályozása: A Fenntartható Vadgazdálkodás Populációökológiai Alapjai 347 (Mezőgazda kiadó, 2011).
Google Scholar 
64.Randi, E. & Lucchini, V. Organization and evolution of the mitochondrial DNA control region in the avian genus Alector-is. J. Mol. Evol. 47, 449–462 (1998).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
65.Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Peterson, D., Filipski, A. & Kumar, S. MEGA6: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 2725–2729 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
66.Xia, X. DAMBE6: New tools for microbial genomics, phylogenetics, and molecular evolution. J. Hered. 108, 431–437 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
67.Librado, P. & Rozas, J. DnaSP v5: A software for comprehensive analysis of DNA polymorphism data. Bioinformatics 25, 1451–1452 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
68.Posada, D. jModelTest: Phylogenetic model averaging. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25, 1253–1256 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
69.Nguyen, L. T., Schmidt, H. A., Von Haeseler, A. & Minh, B. Q. IQ-TREE: a fast and effective stochastic algorithm for estimating maximum-likelihood phylogenies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 32, 268–274 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
70.Hasegawa, M., Kishino, H. & Yano, T. A. Dating of the humanape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J. Mol. Evol. 22, 160–174 (1985).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
71.Bouckaert, R. et al. BEAST 2: A software platform for Bayesian evolutionary analysis. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, e1003537 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
72.Bandelt, H. J., Forster, P. & Röhl, A. Median-joining networks for inferring intraspecific phylogenies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16, 37–48 (1999).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Corander, J., Marttinen, P., Sirén, J. & Tang, J. Enhanced Bayesian modelling in BAPS software for learning genetic struc-tures of populations. BMC Bioinform. 9, 1–14 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
74.Excoffier, L. & Lischer, H. E. Arlequin suite ver 3.5: A new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 10, 564–567 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
75.Heled, J. & Drummond, A. J. Bayesian inference of population size history from multiple loci. BMC Evol. Biol. 8, 289 (2008).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
76.Team, R.C. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2014).
Google Scholar 
77.Fu, Y. X. Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations against population growth, hitchhiking and background selection. Genetics 147, 915–925 (1997).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
78.Tajima, F. The effect of change in population size on DNA polymorphism. Genetics 123, 597–601 (1989).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
79.Rousset, F. Genepop’007: A complete re-implementation of the genepop software for Windows and Linux. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 8, 103–106 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
80.Holm, S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand. J. Stat. 6, 65–70 (1979).MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
81.Pritchard, J. K., Stephens, M. & Donnelly, P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
82.Hubisz, M. J., Falush, D., Stephens, M. & Pritchard, J. K. Inferring weak population structure with the assistance of sample group information. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 9, 1322–1332 (2009).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
83.Earl, D. A. STRUCTURE HARVESTER: A website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv. Genet. Resour. 4, 359–361 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
84.Evanno, G., Regnaut, S. & Goudet, J. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: A simulation study. Mol. Ecol. 14, 2611–2620 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
85.Langguth, T. et al. Genetic structure and phylogeogra-phy of a European flagship species, the white-tailed sea eagle Haliaeetus albicilla. J. Avian Biol. 44, 263–271 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
86.Väli, Ü., Dombrovski, V., Dzmitranok, M., Maciorowski, G. & Meyburg, B. U. High genetic diversity and low differentia-tion retained in the European fragmented and declining Greater Spotted Eagle (Clanga clanga) population. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–11 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
87.Jakobsson, M. & Rosenberg, N. A. CLUMPP: A cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23, 1801–1806 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
88.Rosenberg, N. A. DISTRUCT: A program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol. Ecol. Notes. 4, 137–138 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
89.Corander, J., Sirén, J. & Arjas, E. Bayesian spatial modeling of genetic population structure. Comput. Stat. 23, 111–129 (2008).MathSciNet 
Article 

Google Scholar 
90.Galpern, P., Peres-Neto, P. R., Polfus, J. & Manseau, M. MEMGENE: Spatial pattern detection in genetic distance data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 1116–1120 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
91.Peakall, R., Ruibal, M. & Lindenmayer, D. B. Spatial autocorrelation analysis offers new insights into gene flow in the Aus-tralian bush rat, Rattus fuscipes. Evolution 57, 1182–1195 (2003).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
92.Mullins, J. et al. The influence of habitat structure on genetic differentiation in red fox populations in north-eastern Poland. Acta Theriol. 59, 367–376 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
93.Oksanen, J. Vegan: R Functions for Vegetation Ecologists. http://cc.oulu.fi/_jarioksa/softhelp/vegan.html. (2005).94.Wright, S. Isolation by distance. Genetics 28, 114 (1943).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
95.Peakall, R. & Smouse, P. E. GenAlEx 6.5: Genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and re-search: An update. Bioinformatics 28, 2537–2539 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
96.Goudet, J. FSTAT, A Program to Estimate and Test Gene Diversities and Fixation Indices, Version 2.9. 3. http://www2.unil.ch/popgen/softwares/fstat.htm (2001).97.Yeh, F. C. et al. POPGENE version 1.32. Computer Program and Documentation Distributed by the Author. http://www.ualberta.ca/~fyeh/popgene.html (accessed on 23 January 2013).98.Belkhir, K., Borsa, P., Chikhi, L. & Bonhomme, F. Genetix 4.05: WindowsTM Software for Population Genetics (Laboratoire Genome de Populations University of Montpelier II, 1996).
Google Scholar 
99.Luikart, G., Sherwin, W. B., Steele, B. M. & Allendorf, F. W. Usefulness of molecular markers for detecting population bottlenecks via monitoring genetic change. Mol. Ecol. 7, 963–974 (1998).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
100.Luikart, G., Allendorf, F. W., Cornuet, J. M. & Sherwin, W. B. Distortion of allele frequency distributions provides a test for recent population bottlenecks. J. Hered. 89, 238–247 (1998).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Gallo Marin, B. et al. Predictors of COVID-19 severity: A literature review. Rev. Med. Virol. 31, 1–10 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Worldometers. COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ (Accessed 5 May 2021) (2021).3.The New York Times. Coronavirus World Map: Tracking the Global Outbreak. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/world/coronavirus-maps.html (Accessed 5 May) (2021).4.Sartorius, B., Lawson, A. & Pullan, R. Modelling and predicting the spatio-temporal spread of COVID-19, associated deaths and impact of key risk factors in England. Sci. Rep. 11, 5378 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Gamio, L. & Symonds, A. Global Virus Cases Reach New Peak, Driven by India and South America. https://nyti.ms/3xYVO94 (Accessed on 5 May 2021) (2021).6.Samuel, J. et al. COVID-19 public sentiment insights and machine learning for tweets classification. Information 11, 314 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Borriello, A., Master, D., Pellegrini, A. & Rose, J. M. Preferences for a COVID-19 vaccine in Australia. Vaccine 39, 473–479 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Samuel, J. et al. Feeling positive about reopening? New normal scenarios from COVID-19 US reopen sentiment analytics. IEEE Access 8, 142173–142190 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Max Roser, E. O.-O., Ritchie, H. & Hasell, J. Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus (Accessed on 5 June 2021) (2020).10.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About variants of the virus that causes COVID-19. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/transmission/variant.html (Accessed on 5 June 2021) (2021).11.Ali, G. G. M. N. et al. Public perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines: Policy implications from US spatiotemporal sentiment analytics. Healthcare 9, 1110 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Al Zobbi, M., Alsinglawi, B., Mubin, O. & Alnajjar, F. Measurement method for evaluating the lockdown policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17, 5574 (2020).CAS 
PubMed Central 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
13.Lu, X., Yuan, D., Chen, W. & Fung, J. A machine learning based forecast model for the COVID-19 pandemic and investigation of the impact of government intervention on COVID-19 transmission in China (2020). Preprint on webpage at www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-73671/v1.14.Vinceti, M. et al. Lockdown timing and efficacy in controlling COVID-19 using mobile phone tracking. EClinicalMedicine 25, 100457 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Rahman, M. et al. Machine learning on the COVID-19 pandemic, human mobility and air quality: A review. IEEE Access 9, 72420–72450 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Rahman, M. et al. COVID-19 pandemic severity, lockdown regimes, and people’s mobility: Early evidence from 88 countries. Sustainability 12, 9101 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Silva, P. C. et al. COVID-ABS: An agent-based model of COVID-19 epidemic to simulate health and economic effects of social distancing interventions. Chaos Solitons Fractals 139, 110088 (2020).MathSciNet 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Rahman, M. M. et al. Socioeconomic factors analysis for COVID-19 US reopening sentiment with Twitter and census data. Heliyon 7, e06200 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
19.USAFacts. US COVID-19 cases and deaths by state. https://usafacts.org/visualizations/coronavirus-covid-19-spread-map/ (Accessed 5 June 2021) (2020).20.Wynants, L. et al. Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: Systematic review and critical appraisal. BMJ. 369(8242), m1328 (2020).21.Swapnarekha, H., Behera, H. S., Nayak, J. & Naik, B. Role of intelligent computing in COVID-19 prognosis: A state-of-the-art review. Chaos Solitons Fractals 138, 109947 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Xiang, Y. et al. COVID-19 epidemic prediction and the impact of public health interventions: A review of COVID-19 epidemic models. Infect. Dis. Model. 6, 324–342 (2021).23.Roy, A. & Kar, B. Characterizing the spread of COVID-19 from human mobility patterns and SocioDemographic indicators. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on Advances in Resilient and Intelligent Cities, 39–48 (2020).24.Scarpone, C. et al. A multimethod approach for county-scale geospatial analysis of emerging infectious diseases: A cross-sectional case study of COVID-19 incidence in Germany. Int. J. Health Geogr. 19, 32 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Polyzos, S., Samitas, A. & Spyridou, A. E. Tourism demand and the COVID-19 pandemic: An LSTM approach. Tour. Recreat. Res. 46(2), 1777053 (2020).26.Iwendi, C. et al. COVID-19 patient health prediction using boosted random forest algorithm. Front. Public Health 8, 357 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Hou, X. et al. Intra-county modeling of COVID-19 infection with human mobility: assessing spatial heterogeneity with business traffic, age and race (2020). Preprint on webpage at https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.04.20206763v1.28.Tang, B. et al. An updated estimation of the risk of transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCov). Infect. Dis. Model. 5, 248–255 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
29.Zhao, S. et al. Preliminary estimation of the basic reproduction number of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in China, from 2019 to 2020: A data-driven analysis in the early phase of the outbreak. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 92, 214–217 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Fanelli, D. & Piazza, F. Analysis and forecast of COVID-19 spreading in China, Italy and France. Chaos Solitons Fractals 134, 109761 (2020).MathSciNet 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Choi, S. & Ki, M. Estimating the reproductive number and the outbreak size of COVID-19 in Korea. Epidemiol. Health 42, e2020011 (2020).32.Tolles, J. & Luong, T. Modeling epidemics with compartmental models. JAMA 323, 2515–2516 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Soures, N. et al. SIRNet: Understanding social distancing measures with hybrid neural network model for COVID-19 infectious spread. arXiv (2020). preprint on webpage at arXiv:2004.10376.34.Chimmula, V. K. R. & Zhang, L. Time series forecasting of COVID-19 transmission in Canada using LSTM networks. Chaos Solitons Fractals 135, 109864 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Wang, D. et al. Agent-based Simulation Model and Deep Learning Techniques to Evaluate and Predict Transportation Trends around COVID-19. arXiv (2020). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:2010.09648.36.Kai, D., Goldstein, G.-P., Morgunov, A., Nangalia, V. & Rotkirch, A. Universal masking is urgent in the covid-19 pandemic: Seir and agent based models, empirical validation, policy recommendations. arXiv (2020). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:2004.13553.37.Panovska-Griffiths, J. et al. Modelling the potential impact of mask use in schools and society on COVID-19 control in the UK. Sci. Rep. 11, 8747 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Szczepanek, R. Analysis of pedestrian activity before and during COVID-19 lockdown, using webcam time-lapse from cracow and machine learning. PeerJ 8, e10132 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Ahmed, I., Ahmad, M., Rodrigues, J. J., Jeon, G. & Din, S. A deep learning-based social distance monitoring framework for COVID-19. Sustain. Cities Soc. 65, 102571 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Spada, A. et al. Structural equation modeling to shed light on the controversial role of climate on the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Sci. Rep. 11, 8358 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Jiang, F. et al. Artificial intelligence in healthcare: Past, present and future. Stroke Vasc. Neurol. 2, e000101 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Khalifa, N. E. M., Taha, M. H. N., Ali, D. E., Slowik, A. & Hassanien, A. E. Artificial intelligence technique for gene expression by tumor RNA-Seq data: A novel optimized deep learning approach. IEEE Access 8, 22874–22883 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Dexter, G. P., Grannis, S. J., Dixon, B. E. & Kasthurirathne, S. N. Generalization of machine learning approaches to identify notifiable conditions from a statewide health information exchange. AMIA Summits Transl. Sci. Proc. 2020, 152–161 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
44.Wang, Y., Liao, Z., Mathieu, S., Bin, F. & Tu, X. Prediction and evaluation of plasma arc reforming of naphthalene using a hybrid machine learning model. J. Hazard. Mater. 404, 123965 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Shao, Y. E., Hou, C.-D. & Chiu, C.-C. Hybrid intelligent modeling schemes for heart disease classification. Appl. Soft Comput. 14, 47–52 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Roberts, M. et al. Common pitfalls and recommendations for using machine learning to detect and prognosticate for COVID-19 using chest radiographs and CT scans. Nat. Mach. Intell. 3, 199–217 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Sun, J. et al. Forecasting the long-term trend of COVID-19 epidemic using a dynamic model. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–10 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Chen, Y., Qin, R., Zhang, G. & Albanwan, H. Spatial temporal analysis of traffic patterns during the COVID-19 epidemic by vehicle detection using planet remote-sensing satellite images. Remote Sens. 13, 208 (2021).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Briz-Redón, Á. & Serrano-Aroca, Á. A spatio-temporal analysis for exploring the effect of temperature on COVID-19 early evolution in Spain. Sci. Total Environ. 728, 138811 (2020).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
50.Liu, Q. et al. Spatiotemporal patterns of COVID-19 impact on human activities and environment in mainland China using nighttime light and air quality data. Remote Sens. 12, 1576 (2020).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Jarvis, K. F. & Kelley, J. B. Temporal dynamics of viral load and false negative rate influence the levels of testing necessary to combat COVID-19 spread. Sci. Rep. 11, 1–12 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
52.Ugarte, M. D., Adin, A., Goicoa, T. & Militino, A. F. On fitting spatio-temporal disease mapping models using approximate Bayesian inference. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 23, 507–530 (2014).MathSciNet 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Zhang, C. H. & Schwartz, G. G. Spatial disparities in coronavirus incidence and mortality in the United States: An ecological analysis as of May 2020. J. Rural Health 36, 433–445 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Fitzpatrick, K. M., Harris, C. & Drawve, G. Fear of COVID-19 and the mental health consequences in America. Psychol. Trauma Theory Res. Pract. Policy 12, S17–S21 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Lalmuanawma, S., Hussain, J. & Chhakchhuak, L. Applications of machine learning and artificial intelligence for covid-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic: A review. Chaos Solitons Fractals 139, 110059 (2020).MathSciNet 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Adhikari, B., Xu, X., Ramakrishnan, N. & Prakash, B. A. Epideep: Exploiting embeddings for epidemic forecasting. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, 577–586 (2019).57.Gautam, Y. Transfer learning for COVID-19 cases and deaths forecast using LSTM network. ISA Transactions (2021).58.Chen, S. et al. Exploring feasibility of multivariate deep learning models in predicting covid-19 epidemic. Front. Public Health 9, 661615 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
59.Venna, S. R. et al. A novel data-driven model for real-time influenza forecasting. IEEE Access 7, 7691–7701 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Wu, D. et al. Deepgleam: a hybrid mechanistic and deep learning model for covid-19 forecasting. arXiv (2021). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:2102.06684.61.Zhu, X. et al. Attention-based recurrent neural network for influenza epidemic prediction. BMC Bioinform. 20, 575 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Ben Said, A., Erradi, A., Aly, H. & Mohamed, A. Predicting covid-19 cases using bidirectional lstm on multivariate time series. arXiv (2020). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:2009.12325.63.Aktay A., A. et al. Google COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports: anonymization process description (version 1.1). arXiv (2020). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:2004.04145.64.SafeGraph. SafeGraph Places Schema. https://docs.safegraph.com/docs (Accessed 15 Sept 2020) (2020).65.Johns Hopkins University. COVID-19 dashboard by the center for systems science and engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU). https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/us-map (Accessed 15 Sept 2020) (2020).66.Ray, E. L. et al. Ensemble forecasts of coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in the us. MedRXiv (2020). Preprint on webpage at https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.19.20177493v1.67.Cartenì, A., Di Francesco, L. & Martino, M. How mobility habits influenced the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the Italian case study. Sci. Total Environ. 741, 140489 (2020).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
68.Reich, N. et al. har96, x. Zhang, jinghuichen, G. Espana, X. Xinyue, H. Biegel, L. Castro, Y. Wang, qjhong, E. Lee, A. Baxter, S. Bhatia, E. Ray, and abrennen, and ERDC CV19 Modeling Team (2020). Preprint on webpage at https://github.com/reichlab/covid19-forecast-hub/tree/master/data-processed/COVIDhub-ensemble.69.Hochreiter, S. & Schmidhuber, J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput. 9, 1735–1780 (1997).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
70.Yao, W., Huang, P. & Jia, Z. Multidimensional lstm networks to predict wind speed. In 2018 37th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), 7493–7497 (IEEE, 2018).71.Cromley, E. K. & McLafferty, S. L. GIS and Public Health (Guilford Press, XXX, 2011).
Google Scholar 
72.Veličković, P. et al. Cross-modal recurrent models for weight objective prediction from multimodal time-series data. In Proceedings of the 12th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, 178–186 (2018).73.Shi, X. & Yeung, D.-Y. Machine learning for spatiotemporal sequence forecasting: A survey. arXiv (2018). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:1808.06865.74.Bengio, S., Vinyals, O., Jaitly, N. & Shazeer, N. Scheduled sampling for sequence prediction with recurrent neural networks. arXiv (2015). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:1506.03099.75.Taieb, S. B. & Hyndman, R. Boosting multi-step autoregressive forecasts. In International Conference on Machine Learning, Vol. 32, 109–117 (PMLR, 2014). http://proceedings.mlr.press/v32/taieb14.html.76.Veličković, P. et al. Graph attention networks. arXiv (2017). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:1710.10903.77.Hamilton, W. L., Ying, R. & Leskovec, J. Inductive representation learning on large graphs. arXiv (2017). Preprint on webpage at arXiv:1706.02216. More